The Economics of Thomas Robert Malthus 9781442681156

Table of contents :
Contents
Preface
Acknowledgments
Introduction
I. Early explorations in growth and development theory
1. The Essay on Population, 1798-1807
2. The Malthus-Ricardo correspondence, 1813-1814
3. The Inquiry into Rent (1815)
4. The Malthus-Ricardo correspondence, 1815-1819
5. The Essay on Population revised (1817)
II. Value, distribution, and growth
6. Price theory
7. Value measurement
8. Surplus vs scarcity: A physiocratic dimension
9. Wages and employment
10. Profit-rate analysis
III. Employment, aggregate demand, and money
11. Sustainable growth: Accumulation and the aggregate-demand problem
12. Macro-economic stabilization and applications
13. Money and banking
14. Two issues in international monetary economics
IV. Some empirical estimates
15. Agricultural productivity: Past and prospective
16. Demographic trends: The population problem
V. Trade policy and social welfare
17. Agricultural protection
18. Social reform and the role of government
19. Utilitarianism in a theological context
Conclusion
References
General Index
Index to Correspondence

Citation preview

THE E C O N O M I C S OF THOMAS ROBERT MALTHUS

STUDIES IN CLASSICAL P O L I T I C A L E C O N O M Y / IV

SAMUEL HOLLANDER

The economics of Thomas Robert Malthus

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS Toronto Buffalo London

www.utppublishing.com University of Toronto Press Incorporated 1997 Toronto Buffalo London Printed in Canada ISBN 08020-0790-2 (cloth)

Printed on acid-free paper

Canadian Cataloguing in Publication Data Hollander, Samuel, 1937The economics of Thomas Robert Malthus (Studies in classical political economy ; 4) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-80200790-2 1. Malthus, T.R. (Thomas Robert). 1766-1834. 2. Economics - Great Britain - History. I. Title. II. Series. HB863.H641997

330-15'3

096-931581-3

University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial assistance to its publishing program of the Canada Council and the Ontario Arts Council. This book has been published with the help of a grant from the Humanities and Social Sciences Federation of Canada, using funds provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. The illustration on the jacket and title page is a reproduction of a proof engraving of Malthus in the papers of Piero Sraffa, housed in the Trinity College Library, Cambridge. It appears here by kind permission of the Master and Fellows of Trinity College.

TO PERLETTE

This page intentionally left blank

CONTENTS

PREFACE ACKNOWLEDGMENTS INTRODUCTION

Xlll xvii 3

I / Early explorations in growth and development theory

i THE ESSAY ON POPULATION, 1798-1807

I Introduction II The 'geometrical' and 'arithmetical' ratios III The critique of William Godwin IV Application to the Poor Laws V Diminishing returns and land scarcity-based growth theory VI The downward wage path VII The English case VIII The distribution of activity between agriculture and manufacturing

IX The oscillatory process 42 X Diminishing returns and growth, 1803 47 XI The 1806 defence 56 XII Food and population: The order of precedence and the oscillatory process, 1803, 1806/7 63 XIII Summary and conclusion 67

2 13

THE MALTHUS-RICARDO CORRESPONDENCE, 1813-1814

18

I Introduction II Direct effect of agricultural productivity on profit rate denied: The stimulatory effect of agricultural protection III Effect of agricultural productivity conceded and the 'temporary' effect of manufacturing prosperity IV The profit-rate trend elaborated V Concluding remarks

22 25 27 33 35

39

70

72

82 90 93

vili C O N T E N T S 3

THE INQUIRY INTO RENT (1815)

I Introduction II An agricultural-growth model and an extension III On the rising real costs of marginal extensions: An alternative perspective IV Two classes of stationary state V The effect of exogenous increase in the corn price VI Reactions by Ricardo VII Summary and conclusion

95 96

103 107 108 110 112

4 THE MALTHUS-RICARDO CORRESPONDENCE, 1815-1819

I Introduction II Agricultural expansion and profit-rate increase III An evaluation of the Essay on Profits1 IV On the advantages of a high corn price V Restatement of objections to Ricardo's 'new view' VI On the wage-profit relation VII The source of the contrasting positions VIII First reactions to Ricardo's Principles IX A summing-up on the trend paths of the factor returns

III Land scarcity, the factor returns, and prudential population control IV Prudence endogenized V Changes in ceteris paribus conditions VI The response to Weyland: Implications for the growth model VII Manufacturing expansion and population growth VIII The order of precedence of food supply and population growth, and the 'oscillatory' process IX Concluding notes: Some interpretive problems

182 190 193

195 203

207 212

114

II / Value, distribution, and growth

116

6

128

I Introduction II On utility III The theory of exchange IV The theory of demand V The limitations of demand- supply analysis VI Cost-price analysis: General themes VII The case against the labour theory: Time VIII The case against the labour theory: Rent IX Malthus and J.B. Say

PRICE THEORY

134 136 156 160 163

217 220 223 225 238 242 248 254 263

167

5 THE ESSAY ON POPULATION REVISED (l8l7)

I Introduction 173 II Checks to growth in 'agricultural,' 'commercial,' and 'mixed' systems 174

7 VALUE MEASUREMENT

I Introduction II Value measurement and general purchasing power III On Ricardo's money measure of labour embodiment

272 275

283

C O N T E N T S ix

IV A proposed linked corn-labour index 286 V Abandonment of quest for an index of purchasing power 289 VI Labour command as measure of absolute supply conditions 293 VII Measurement of supply conditions, 1823 300 VIII Supply conditions and the profit rate 306 IX Supply conditions and the labour market 312 X The measure in a growth context 317 XI The Ricardo-Malthus exchange, 1823 321 XII J.S. Mill on The Measure of Value 333 XIII The response to Samuel Bailey 336 XIV A summary formulation, 1827 344 XV Summary and conclusion 349 Appendix: Table illustrating the invariable Value of Labour and its Results' 352 8 SURPLUS VS SCARCITY: A PHYSIOCRATIC DIMENSION

I Introduction II On 'surplus': The Essay on Population III On sectoral interdependence IV Agriculture as sole source of surplus confirmed V Surplus vs scarcity: The pamphlets of 1815 and the Principles VI Ricardo's objections: The land-scarcity condition VII Malthus and land

353 355 363 365 369 379

scarcity: The response to Ricardo VIII The growth context IX The diminishing-returns complexity elaborated X Mai thus's 'debt' to the Physiocrats XI Summary and conclusion: The disintegration of Malthusian physiocracy

382 391 394 403 406

9 WAGES AND EMPLOYMENT

I Introduction II Labour supply: Wages and population growth III Labour demand IV Family earnings and full employment V Summary and conclusion

412 412 419 429 433

10 PROFIT-RATE ANALYSIS

I Introduction II The secular decline of the profit and wage rates III The determining role of the agricultural profit rate: A 'corn profit' model IV The corn-profit interpretation elaborated V The manufacturing profit rate VI The effect of real-wage fluctuations VII The inverse wage-profit or 'proportionality' theorem VIII Further evidence for the proportionality theorem IX Further elaborations in The Measure of Value X Objections to the law of markets XI Summary and conclusion

435 437 446 459 464 468 476 486 488 492 497

X CONTENTS

III / Employment, aggregate demand, and money

11 SUSTAINABLE GROWTH: ACCUMULATION AND THE AGGREGATE-DEMAND PROBLEM

I Introduction II Productive and unproductive labour III The problem of sustainable growth IV On working-class consumption V On the determinants of saving VI The 'glut' controversy elaborated VII The attack on Say's Law: A micro-economic rationale VIII Trade and sustainable growth IX On the efficiency gains from trade: a digression X Trade: The measurement problem XI On the endogeneity of financial means XII Distribution of property and sustainable growth XIII 'Unproductive' consumption XIV 'New inventions' and sustainable growth XV On gross and net revenue XVI Secular stagnation in a development context XVII Summary and conclusion

505 508 514

586 595 615 623 628

13 MONEY AND BANKING

526 529 532 541 542 547 552 558

I Introduction II The case for gold III Meaning and extent of a 'depreciated' currency, 1797-1811 IV Banking policy: Bank of England defence refuted V Bullionism reinforced: A re-evaluation of changes in the value of bullion VI Monetary policy VII Summary and conclusion

630 631 636 644 660 666 676

14 TWO ISSUES IN INTERNATIONAL MONETARY ECONOMICS

562 563 567 573 575 583

12 MACRO-ECONOMIC STABILIZATION

AND APPLICATIONS

I Introduction

II Analysis of the wartime expansion . III Analysis of the postwar depression IV The policy problem defined: A weighing of options V Government expenditure and finance VI Summary and conclusion

586

I Introduction II Malthus on remittances and the exchange rate: His initial statement III Ricardo's response: The appendix to The High Price of Bullion IV Further elaborations in correspondence V The transfer problem: A summary VI On the cost of obtaining the precious metals VII Some empirical observations

677 679 688 692 708 711 732

C O N T E N T S XI

VIII International prices: A summary

734

IV / Some empirical estimates 15 AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTIVITY: PAST AND PROSPECTIVE

I Introduction 739 II Early formulations, 1798-1806 741 III The diminishing-returns principle applied, 1813-1814 747 IV Productivity estimates, 1815 752 V Productivity estimates, 1817 761 VI Empirical estimates in the Principles 769 VII Summary and conclusion 783 16 DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS: THE POPULATION PROBLEM

I Introduction II Malthus on contemporary population growth, 1798 and 1803 III Contemporary and prospective agricultural development: A summary IV The population problem V Postwar evaluations VI More on prudence VII Summary

784 787

825 830 832 834 842 846 856 866

868 868 871

18 SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

792 793 796 802 803

V / Trade policy and social welfare 17 AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION

I Introduction II Early opposition to 'commercial systems': 1803, 1806 III The 'free trade' position in 1813-1814

IV The case for protection, 1815: Aggregate activity, class distribution, and security V The case for protection, 1815: A 'utilitarian' overview VI 'Agricultural bias,' 1815 VII Balanced growth and protectionism, 1817 VIII The case for intervention, 1820 IX Mai thus's new position: The evidence X The rationale for the policy transition XI Summary and conclusion Appendix A: Gainful labour force and labour participation ratios, Great Britain, 1780-1851 Appendix B: Digest of major Corn Laws Appendix C: Huskisson and others and the abandonment of agricultural protection

807 812 820

I Introduction II Policy objectives: 'High' wages and population growth III On Malthus's 'pessimism' IV The first (1798) Essay: Prudence vs poverty V The transition from 1798: The moral calculus elaborated VI Prologue to the theory of economic policy: The Principles VII Labour policy and social control VIII Income distribution IX Conclusion

872 875 880 881 886 890 892 911 914

xii C O N T E N T S

19 UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT

I Introduction II The theological chapters of the first Essay III A utility calculus, 1798 IV Moral restraint and utilitarianism V Prudential control and utilitarianism VI More on the desirability of population expansion VII Summary and conclusion

917 921 926 930 939 942 946

CONCLUSION

I Introduction II Malthus's positive case for deductive theory and his practice III The formal critique of Ricardian theory IV Methodological objections to Adam Smith

949 951 964 969

V On verification, prediction, and disturbing causes: The uses of economic theory 975 VI The 'Doctrine of Proportions': Political economy and mathematics 980 VII The charge of 'inconsistency' and related matters 986 VIII The Ricardo-Malthus relation reviewed 994 IX A final summing-up: Malthus, the classics, and Keynes 1002 Appendix: Malthus and Keynes: Some recent 1006 secondary literature REFERENCES

ICXX)

GENERAL INDEX INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE

1O51

1O27

PREFACE

This book is the fourth in my series Studies in Classical Political Economy, the first three volumes of which treat, respectively, the economics of Adam Smith (1973), David Ricardo (1979), and John Stuart Mill (1985). In the last two of those studies, and also in my text Classical Economics (1987), I approached Mai thus's economics as the foil that set off Ricardo and Mill rather than in its own right. In this work I reverse the perspective, especially with regard to the Malthus-Ricardo link, and attempt to do full justice to Malthus, with reference to demography; economic growth; aggregate demand; value and distribution; money, banking, and trade; and the theory of policy. The study culminates in a drawing-together of the whole from the perspective of methodology. A general objective here is to evaluate Lord Keynes's famous statement of the dichotomy between Ricardian and Malthusian method: 'In economic discussions Ricardo was the abstract and a priori theorist, Malthus the inductive and intuitive investigator who hated to stray too far from what he could test by reference to the facts and his own intuitions'; but 'it was Ricardo's more fascinating intellectual construction which was victorious, and Ricardo who, by turning his back so completely on Malthus's ideas, constrained the subject for a full hundred years in an artificial groove.' Isolating the source of the theoretical differences between Ricardo and Malthus by referring to their formally stated methodological predilections (in this manner) proves unconvincing; all in all, it emerges that, on the broad grounds of method, the contestants were far closer than is generally supposed. Defining Malthus's relation to certain of his predecessors is a further general concern in this work. Malthus was by no means obeisant to Adam Smith; yet the roots of many of his views can be found in the

xiv P R E F A C E

Wealth of Nations, including aspects of his position on aggregate demand. An unravelling of the complex web of ideas involving Smith, Malthus, and Ricardo is of particular intellectual interest, considering Lord Robbins's observation that Malthus's role in building up the classical system 'is a matter likely to arouse much more controversy than the answer to a similar question in the case of the other great classical economists.' Most significant, a physiocratic or quasi-physiocratic dimension to Malthus's work hitherto underestimated by scholars emerges. As well, an unexpected 'Sraffian' dimension - the corn-profit model - is shown to be present. These results may have major implications for nineteenth- and twentieth-century historiography. This study addresses the relation between Malthusian theory and the available empirical data. The results prove particularly significant with respect to demography and growth theory, revealing the illegitimacy of the textbook perspective that characterizes Malthus as a social-welfare pessimist. The common notion of Malthus as spokesman of the landowning classes is also shown to be a fallacy. A fundamentally important discovery that throws much light on this issue relates to Malthus's ultimate abandonment of agricultural protectionism. With it, he in effect turned away from the physiocratic orientation and threw in his lot with the Ricardians, for it was his support of the 1815 Corn Bill that had struck so discordant a note from a 'classical' economist. A further undertaking of this work is to evaluate the standard charges against Malthus of inconsistency, and even intellectual dishonesty. Here, these charges are shown to be seriously exaggerated. The implications of his theology are also investigated and shown to be unobtrusive, despite appearances, as far as concerns his positive economics and policy recommendations. The methodological approach followed is that of the earlier volumes in this series. I adopt a combination of what the late George Stigler refers to as 'scientific exegesis,' which seeks that interpretation which maximizes the number of major theoretical conclusions that follow from alternative readings of the text, and 'personal exegesis,' which seeks that interpretation which best satisfies the writer's style (in the broadest sense of the term), method, and objective. Thus, in the interpretative process, allowance is made for both the logical and the biographical. I take issue with those historians of economics who believe that the researcher must pretend to lack knowledge of the future beyond the period under study in order to avoid the danger of anachronistic readings. Of course, we must avoid superimposing on an early writer reference frameworks that were developed only subsequently. But such a constraint does not require that we avoid modern vocabulary and categories in tracing the filiation of ideas. One is writing, after all, for modern readers. There is also a sophisticated form of anachronism that entails denying the presence in an early writer's work of modern concepts merely because they are expressed differently.

P R E F A C E XV

Tracing the filiation of ideas requires common sense and good judgment, not a pretence at innocent ignorance. I should state at the outset my own personal attitude towards Malthus. Despite all the trouble he has caused me, I remain an admirer. I admire, above all, his courageous, politically incorrect recommendation for the control of population growth, against the official views of the church and military of the day, and despite his own status as priest of the Church of England. Had he lived today he would surely have been hauled before some college committee for his Travel Diaries. And who cannot like a man who penned this on his way up the River Elbe to Hamburg: 'The master of our boat... hailed his wife from the shore & brought forwards two or three of the groups to see us pass. It is difficult to judge of the happiness of a people through a telescope, which by the by we used to bring them near to us, but, influenced perhaps by the fineness of the evening & the beauty of the scene, we could not help fancying from the air of neatness & cheerfulness that seemed generally to prevail among the cottages, that the inhabitants were happy' (1966, 31). Finally, I greatly admire his abandonment of agricultural protectionism. It is only a pity that Ricardo did not live to witness it. Critics lamented that the earlier volumes in this series grew in size exponentially. I have taken their complaint to heart; this book is no longer than my Mill. And to help readers (and me) negotiate the material, I have inserted an unusually generous set of cross-references.

This page intentionally left blank

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I commenced this study during the academic year 1987-8 while visiting the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, and continued my preliminary researches at the University of Auckland, New Zealand, where I was a University of Auckland Foundation Visitor. I am most grateful to those institutions for providing admirable facilities. It is customary for an author to acknowledge individuals who have provided advice and criticism while, at the same time, retaining responsibility for remaining errors and defects; I shall abide by this commendable practice - while also taking credit for at least some of the positive features of this work - and express my warmest appreciation to a large number of friends and colleagues who have helped me one way or another. Even if they have forgotten, I have not. My thanks go to: R.D.C. Black; Giovanni Caravale; Lila Costabile; Tim Davis; Robert Dorfman; Walter Elds; Tony Endres; Stanley Engerman; the late Robert Fenn; the late Barry Gordon; Arnold Heertje; Jim Irwin; Tom Kompas; Cigdem Kurdas; Heinz Kurz; Sergio Nistico; Sandra Peart; J.-P. Platteau; Bette Polkinghorn; Pier-Luigi Porta; John Pullen; Kevin Reilly; Annalisa Rosselli; Paul Samuelson; Brenda Spotton; Ian Steedman; the late George Stigler; and Masazumi Wakatabe. My intellectual obligations to David Levy and A.M.C. Waterman are very great indeed; I cannot find adequate words to express my appreciation for their careful reading of my manuscript, and their tolerance even when we differ. Kelly Baxter, Rafael Gomez, Agnes Kruchio, Alexandra Mackay, Raphael Solomon, Andrew Tepperman, Antonella Vergati, and Lata Narayanaswamy provided efficient research assistance. I'm grateful to Margaret Cronan for preparing the indexes. My thanks also go to Leanne Pander and Dianne Gutscher, of the Bowdoin College Library; Jill Richardson, of the War Memorial Library, Jesus College, Cambridge; Angela Whitelegge, of the Goldsmith's Library, Uni-

xviil

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

versity of London; Jonathan Smith, of Trinity College Library, Cambridge; to the staff at John Murray, London, for access to their archives; and to the library staff at the British Library, the London School of Economics, New College Edinburgh, the National Library of Scotland, the University Library Cambridge, and the Public Archives, Matlock, Derbyshire. I am much indebted to the late Professor Kenneth Bourne of the London School of Economics for his permission to see and refer to some of Malthus's letters. It is a pleasure to express appreciation for the generous assistance provided by Gerald Schwartz of the Onex Corporation, Toronto; by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada; and by the Acting Dean of Arts and Science, the Vice-President of Research and International Relations, and the Humanities and Social Sciences Committee at the University of Toronto. In regard to research funding, as well as moral support, I owe a substantial debt to the initiatives taken by my friend Ian Mirlin. I wish to thank the Derbyshire Record Office, Matlock, for permission to reproduce extracts from Malthus's correspondence in their collection; the Master and Fellows of Trinity College, Cambridge, for permission to cite from a letter Malthus wrote to Whewell, held in the Whewell Papers; New College, Edinburgh, for permission to cite from material in the Thomas Chalmers Collection; the British Library for permission to cite from the Macvey Napier and Arthur Young papers.

THE ECONOMICS OF THOMAS ROBERT MALTHUS

This page intentionally left blank

INTRODUCTION

This book I think of as a natural partner to my Economics of David Ricardo (i979)- It should have been written next in sequence, though for various reasons I chose to turn first to The Economics of John Stuart Mill (1985). My mode of interpretation is the same as in those earlier volumes: I keep very close to the text as a means to the end of discerning 'authorial intent.' My procedure is not simple-minded. It does not preclude an interest in 'rhetoric' and other literary devices designed to persuade readers (the 'arithmetic' and 'geometric' ratios provide a prime instance). And it does not preclude 'inconsistency,' though to rely too soon on that as an escape route mitigates against the requirement to take the text seriously. But consistency, even as a working hypothesis, does not mean that a particular theory is developed ab initio; not only must we recognize that a writer may change his opinion over time, but we must also allow for periods when a position is in the course of development, and therefore not yet fully defined or firmly established in his mind. Nor does consistency mean that the writer cannot have more than one theory simultaneously, or make more than one particular assumption about some variable or functional relation; different purposes may call for different assumptions and different models, depending on the context. While allowing for the foregoing situations, I exclude inconsistency or error - always in relation to the writer's frame of reference, not some other - except as a last resort. Some varieties of inconsistency, however, may not be serious; a writer may introduce a definition and not keep to it on every single occasion. Such carelessness is common enough even among those who are otherwise consistent in their substantive model-building. The topics covered include those discussed in the earlier works - particularly value, distribution, growth, and money. Value measurement receives

4 INTRODUCTION

special attention - more than is usual in most commentaries - and the population issue and the problem of aggregate demand - both treated from theoretical, empirical, and policy perspectives - figure large. The organization of a vast mass of material proved difficult in the extreme. Over a period of some three decades, Malthus wrote a flow of works that he subjected to continual alteration. I have attempted to take account of the modifications. For the Essay on Population, I have used the originals for the third (1806), fourth (1807), and fifth (1817) versions, and the Wrigley-Souden edition of Mai thus's Works for the first (1798), second (1803), and sixth (1826).* (For an evaluation of this edition, see Hollander, iggia.) Because of the centrality of the Essay in social history w respect to economic development and demography, and in order to keep a firm handle on the chronological development of Malthus's position, I have kept the discussion of that work in these spheres within part I, which is designated 'Early explorations ...' Part I also takes account of Malthus's famous correspondence with Ricardo, both before and after the appearance of his pamphlets of 1814-15, again with respect to growth and development. (For those pamphlets, I rely on the Wrigley-Souden edition; and, for the correspondence, on Sraffa's edition of Ricardo's Works.) I use the term 'early explorations in growth and development' in order to draw some kind of dividing line between the last major revision to the Essay, occurring in 1817, and the Principles of 1820. Unfortunately, the Principles is far from a polished statement of position; although its revision was set in hand almost immediately after it appeared in print, the preparation of a second edition remained unfinished at Malthus's death. But at least it does contain an effort to convey essentials. Again, my concern is to trace changes in Malthus's position over time in the Principles itself, and between die Principles and the Essay on Population and the 1814-15 pamphlets. The Cambridge edition of the Principles, edited by John Pullen, has proven invaluable. One outcome of this study - perhaps it will prove the major outcome - is the discernment of a possible backward link between the Physiocrats and Malthus, partly mediated via Adam Smith, and a forward link to Sraffa in so far as Malthus developed explicitly a corn-profit model. (His Sraffian-style value theory was earlier discerned by Costabile, 1983.) A by-product of the exercise is the strong confirmation of Ricardo as an economist fully in the 'scarcity' tradition. For it is Ricardo who insisted, against Malthus, on treating corn precisely as any other product in terms of independent demand and supply functions, and who rejected the superior productivity attribi As a typical example of the tinkering: In the 1803 edition, Malthus wrote: 'Upon the whole ... our commerce has not done much for our agriculture; but... our agriculture has done a great deal for our commerce.' In 1806 this is modified: 'Our commerce has not done so much for our agriculture as our agriculture has for our commerce.' In 1807, he fiddled some more: 'It must be allowed ... upon the whole, that our commerce has not done more for our agriculture, than our agriculture for our commerce.'

INTRODUCTION 5

uted to agricultural activity. How far Malthus retained his physiocratic orientation will greatly preoccupy us here. In the end he surrendered much of it, and with it went his agricultural protectionism. Ricardo had won a great posthumous victory. It is Ricardo, too, who is shown to have priority over Malthus for the simultaneous decline in real-wage and profit rates in a growing economy subject to land scarcity, as portrayed in Samuelson's 'canonical' classical growth model (1978). Neither recognized Adam Smith's contribution. I have designed the concluding chapter as a summary statement of the main results of my analysis viewed from a methodological standpoint. There I consider the commonly raised charges of inherent inconsistency, and even intellectual dishonesty, to be found in the literature on Malthus. The reader who seeks a preview might even start with that last chapter. Here I shall briefly summarize some reactions to Malthusian method in order to set the stage. Keynes wrote of the Ricardo-Malthus friendship that it 'will live in history on account of its having given rise to the most important literary correspondence in the whole development of Political Economy' (1933,137). This still remains true. It was something of a love-hate relationship for Ricardo. He took Malthus very seriously - why else the lengthy correspondence and his Notes on Malthus's Principles and Measure of Valued But he was frustrated. He complained in 1815 of the excessive complexity, even incoherence, of Malthus's position as it emerged in the essays of 1814-15: 'The whole appears to me a labyrinth of difficulties; one is no sooner got over than another presents itself, and so in endless succession' (17 April 1815; 195173, VI, 214). A year later, he looked forward to finding in the prospective fifth edition of the Essay on Population 'a regular and connected statement of your opinions on what I deem the most difficult, and perhaps the most important topic of Political Economy, namely the progress of a country in wealth and the laws by which the increasing produce is distributed' (23 February 1816; VII, 24). Before the appearance of the Principles (when already familiar with parts of the manuscript), he expressed the hope of finding there a statement of Malthus's general system: 'I wish to have an opportunity of judging of your system as a whole, and therefore shall be glad when it comes in its printed form' (20 August 1818; 284); but this proved premature, for shortly after he suggested to James Mill that the delay reflected 'doubts which [Malthus] cannot help entertaining of the correctness of his opinions. So much for Polit. Econ.' (28 December 1818; 379-80). Apart from his difficulties in pinning Malthus down, Ricardo complained that Malthus misunderstood and misrepresented him: T am glad,' he wrote to Trower, 'that you speak with approbation of the spirit in which I carry on the contest with Mr. Malthus - I always wish him to see what I have against his opinions before I publish them, that I may be sure that I have not misunderstood him, and therefore not misrepresented him. He certainly has not done the same to me, and has, I am sure without intend-

6 INTRODUCTION

ing it, misrepresented me in many important particulars' (2 March 1821; VIII, 349). Several conspicuous instances of 'misrepresentation' caused Ricardo distress, and we shall see that on one occasion he protested: This is disingenuous.' Ricardo, in all this, took for granted that Mai thus's (failed) procedure was of the hypothetico-deductive variety. Francis Horner, too, emphasized the 'speculative' dimension of Malthus's economics - and a related love of 'paradox': 'Malthus has been a day or two in town; and gave me a little of his society, enough to enable me to judge of him; and I am happy to say, that a more philosophic candour, calm love of truth, and ingenious turn for speculation in his important branch, I have seldom met with. It is quite delightful to find, how closely he has taught himself to examine the circumstances of the lower classes of society, and what a scientific turn he gives the subject. There is a new speculation of his, about the importance of the people being fed dear, which I wish you were here to discuss; it has the look of a paradox, and, like most of his views, is revolting to the common belief; but I have not yet detected the fallacy, if there is one' (to Lord Webb Seymour, 6 July 1807; in Horner, 1853, I> 433-4)- Horner went yet further, complaining to John Murray of Malthus's drawing deductions from inadequately formulated axioms: 'I think in this review [of Newenham] you will find the defect to which I have already alluded, and which affects all Malthus's writings; a want of precision in the statement of his principles, and distinct perspicuity in upholding the consequences which he traces from them' (27 October 1808; 463-4). This is, in fact, close to a charge against Malthus of practising the 'Ricardian Vice.' Horner was not alone. John Weyland (1816) objected strongly to a procedure defining the 'natural tendency of population to increase' or the maximum conceivable geometric rate, and then considering the 'checks' that constrain the actual behind the maximum rate. Researchers would do better 'if, instead of blindly acquiescing in these assumed data, they proceed to inquire into the degree in which the principle of population naturally and really operates in the several stages of society. They will find this to be very distinct from its assumed "possible" operation, and in most cases to be very far from having a necessary tendency "to push the number of people beyond the point at which food can be acquired from them"' (20). This is to turn all Malthus's formal objections against Ricardo 180 degrees against himself. There were other severe critics, Robert Torrens among them.2 Torrens 2 At age seventeen and heavily influenced by James Mill, J.S. Mill responded to Malthus's 1824 critique of the New School in unpleasant terms: 'If Mr. Malthus excels in any thing, it is not certainly in smoothing the road to knowledge; and if any truths are contained in the works to which we have alluded' - The Measure of Value and the Principles - 'they must be of the number of truths which lie hidden in the bottom of a well' (18253/1967, IV, 28). 'If, indeed, it be a merit to puzzle what is plain, to render intricate that which is simple, obscure that which is clear, and difficult that which is easy, it would be hard to find in the whole circle of Political Economists, one with whose merits he might not vie' (43).

INTRODUCTION 7

lists a litany of sins - lack of originality; weakness in logical deduction; inconsistency, particularly in policy matters. For Torrens had 'looked in vain for a development of principles before undiscovered, or for consistent deductions from those already established. It is a singular fact, and one which it is not improper to impress upon the public, that, in the leading questions of economical science, Mr. Mai thus scarcely ever embraced a principle, which he did not subsequently abandon' (1815, viii-ix). But although Malthus's works 'cannot, perhaps, in any instance, be safely consulted for practical authorities, they may always be advantageously referred to as furnishing materials for speculation, and suggesting hints for inquiry' (xi-xii). A rather condescending allowance. So, too, is the observation that the lack of system - at least, of faulty system - itself protected Malthus against conspicuous error, though the inductivist 'spirit' of Malthus's work is more warmly received: 'The spirit, too, in which his essays are written, forms a pleasing contrast to that which pervades the publications of certain economists, patrician and plebeian, who, having lost themselves in the labyrinth of erroneous theory, with disdainful pertinacity reject the clue of facts' (xii). Torrens later described Malthus's Principles as 'a chaos of original but unconnected elements,' contrasting with Ricardo's, which went too far in the opposite direction, 'possess [ing] a regularity and simplicity beyond what exists in nature' (1821, v). Though he now allowed Malthus a degree of originality, he dismissed Malthus on gluts as 'vague, fallacious, and inconsistent throughout' (385). Torrens implicitly ascribed to Malthus a 'Baconian' procedure, though he was scarcely enthusiastic. But there is also the very positive perspective of the so-called inductivists to which we now turn. The charges against Malthus for lack of 'system,' deficient deduction, and inconsistency were seen in a very different light in some quarters. Malthus is often said to have been party to the concerted attack on Ricardo launched by Cambridge inductivists, represented in economics by Richard Jones. The matter is complex since pinning down what the inductivist method consisted of is difficult. In fact, Jones puffed out a smokescreen, for he never abandoned the deductive method he so harshly condemned, adopting indeed some of its least defensible traits (see Hollander, 1985, I: 36-46). That he failed to lay out an effective alternative troubled his co-worker William Whewell, as is clear from a letter to Jones in February 1831: 'How can you expect to lay down rules and describe an extensive method with no examples to guide and substantiate your speculations? You may say a number of fine things and give rules that look wise and arguments that look pretty, but you have no security that these devices are at all accurate or applicable' (Todhunter, 1876, II, 115-16). But an impression of a distinct inductivist alternative was created by Jones, and Jones excluded Malthus as well as Adam Smith from his general indictment of the British economists (1831, v-vi). Keynes in our century carried on the favourable Jones tradition. His famous biographical essay - surely the most cited evaluation in the litera-

8 INTRODUCTION

ture - gives Malthus excellent press on methodological grounds: 'In economic discussions Ricardo was the abstract and a priori theorist, Malthus the inductive and intuitive investigator who hated to stray too far from what he could test by reference to the facts and his own intuitions' (1933, 135). The High Price of Provisions (1800) indicated 'that Malthus was already disposed to a certain line of approach in handling practical economic problems which he was to develop later in his correspondence with Ricardo, - a method which to me is most sympathetic, and, as I think, more likely to lead to right conclusions than the alternative approach of Ricardo. But it was Ricardo's more fascinating intellectual construction which was victorious, and Ricardo who, by turning his back so completely on Malthus's ideas, constrained the subject for a full hundred years in an artificial groove' (122). The charge against Ricardo for holding economics back for a century is asserted by Keynes repeatedly, always with a valid 'Malthusian' alternative in mind: According to Malthus's good common-sense notions prices and profits are primarily determined by something which he described, though none too clearly, as 'effective demand.' Ricardo favoured a much more rigid approach, went behind 'effective demand' to the underlying conditions of money on the one hand and real costs and the real division of the product on the other, conceived these fundamental factors as automatically working themselves out in a unique and unequivocal way, and looked on Malthus's method as very superficial. But Ricardo, in the course of simplifying the many successive stages of his highly abstract argument, departed, necessarily and more than he himself was aware, away from the actual facts; whereas Malthus, by taking up the tale much nearer its conclusion, had a firmer hold on what may be expected to happen in the real world. Ricardo is the father of such things as the Quantity Theory of Money and the Purchasing Power Parity of the Exchanges. When one has painfully escaped from the intellectual domination of these pseudo-arithmetical doctrines, one is able, perhaps for the first time for a hundred years, to comprehend the real significance of the vaguer intuitions of Malthus. (122-3) The Ricardo-Malthus correspondence revealed 'the seeds of economic theory, and also the divergent lines - so divergent at the outset that the destination can scarcely be recognised as the same until it is reached - along which the subject can be developed. Ricardo is investigating the theory of the distribution of the product in conditions of equilibrium, and Malthus is concerned with what determines the volume of output day by day in the real world. Malthus is dealing with the monetary economy in which we happen to live; Ricardo with the abstraction of a neutral money economy' (138). 'One cannot rise from a perusal of this correspondence without a feeling that the almost total obliteration of Malthus's line of approach and the complete domination of Ricardo's for a period of a hundred years has been a disaster to the progress of economics. Time after time in these

INTRODUCTION

9

letters Malthus is talking plain sense, the force of which Ricardo with his head in the clouds wholly fails to comprehend. Time after time a crushing refutation by Malthus is met by a mind so completely closed that Ricardo does not even see what Malthus is saying ...' (141). 'If only Malthus, instead of Ricardo,' Keynes lamented, 'had been the parent stem from which nineteenth-century economics had proceeded, what a much wiser and richer place the world would be to-day! We have laboriously to re-discover and force through the obscuring envelopes of our misguided education what should never have ceased to be obvious. I have long claimed Robert Malthus as the first of the Cambridge economists ...' (144-5). In more recent commentary we find the same sharp contrasts drawn between Ricardian and Malthusian method. Myint, for example, emphasizes Malthus's concern with the short-run, contrasting with the long-run, normal equilibrium of Ricardo (1948, 35). Neil de Marchi and R.P. Sturges describe Malthus as 'the insistent realist, countering Ricardo's "strong cases" with reference to specific historical experience, and calling attention to what happens during the "intervals" ignored by Ricardo's long-run equilibrium analysis' (1973, 379). Hutchison points to the Introduction to the Principles, where 'Malthus did something to uphold the empiricalhistorical method of Adam Smith' (1978, 55). Pullen refers to 'the importance of observed facts in political economy [which] reflects the empirical side of Malthus's own methodology, and reminds us that he was a professor of history as well as political economy' (1989, xlvii). Pullen also puts great weight on the distinctiveness of Malthus's method implicit in his celebrated 'doctrine of proportions,' even relating this orientation to his character (1982). Hodgson (1993) classifies Malthus, together with Veblen, as adopting an open-ended evolutionary perspective. And among the old instiunionists, John Commons was greatly enamoured: 'He was the first scientific evolutionist, indeed the first scientific economist, in that he derived his theory, not from assumptions, like Smith's reversal of the historic process, but from investigation of the process itself (1934, 246). As for the Essay on Population, it is allowed, even by those who draw sharp contrasts between Malthusian and Ricardian methodology in favour of the former, that the 1798 version was too much of the extreme deductive variety. Whewell took this view: 'A good deal of the Malthus's population is a beginning of such a process [genuine induction] excluding of course his anticipatory thesis, the only thing usually talked of (Todhunter, 1876, 11,115-16). Marshall contrasted the first and later editions: 'In the first edition ... Malthus gave his argument without any detailed statement of facts ... In the second edition, 1803, he based himself on so wide and careful a statement of facts as to claim a place among the founders of historical economies' (1820, i79n). Keynes expressed much the same opinion: 'The first essay is not only a priori and philosophical in method, but it is bold and rhetorical in style with much bravura of language and sentiment; whereas in the later editions political philosophy gives way to political economy,

10 I N T R O D U C T I O N

general principles are overlaid by the inductive verifications of a pioneer in sociological history, and the brilliance and high spirits of a young man writing in the last years of the Directory disappear' (1933, 117). Again: 'Maithus's transition from the a priori methods of Cambridge - whether Paley, the Mathematical Tripos, or the Unitarians - to the inductive arguments of the later editions was assisted by a tour which he undertook in search of materials' in 1799 and 1802 (120-1). And Hutchison assures his readers that 'Malthus had, of course, matured, methodologically, as contrasted with the dogmatic, a priori deductivism of his first Essay, which was on somewhat Millian-Ricardian lines' (1978, 56n). This general consensus seems now to be under revision. Malthusian theory has been increasingly subjected to 'rational reconstruction' in mathematical terms. The old view of Malthus as a 'hopelessly muddled thinker ... has been turned on its head in recent years and his reputation as a theoretician is deservedly higher than at any time this century' (Rutherford, 1987, 175). Much of what follows in this book points to the untenability of any notion that a sharply differentiated methodology distinguishes Malthus from Ricardo. We establish, in particular, a penchant of Malthus's for 'long-run' analysis carried even further in some conspicuous respects than by Ricardo. And though it is true enough that Malthus failed to develop a full-fledged 'system,' this was certainly his ideal.

I / E A R L Y EXPLORATIONS IN GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

This page intentionally left blank

ONE

The Essay on Population, 1798-1807

I

INTRODUCTION

Malthus's intentions in his celebrated 'arithmetic ratio' of food increase and 'geometric ratio' of population increase remain in dispute. It has long been a matter of debate whether this formulation reflected the principle of diminishing returns. We have Cannan's insistence upon the absence of the law in any meaningful sense: 'that law remained practically unknown till near the close of the Great War. Malthus may, perhaps, display some inkling of it here and there in the first edition. In the second he certainly uses one of the principal ideas on which it is based as an incidental and subsidiary argument. In the later editions its existence is frequently recognized. But to imagine that the Essay on the Principle of Population was ever based on the law of diminishing returns is to confuse Malthusianism as expounded by J.S. Mill with Malthusianism as expounded by Malthus' (1917, 113-14). From Cannan's standpoint the geometric and arithmetic ratios do not reflect the law: The question of population with Malthus was not, as it is with us, a question of the density of population and productiveness of industry, but a question about the comparative rapidity of the increase of population and of the increase of the annual produce of food' (108). 'Overpopulation,' in the sense that, if population were smaller, average product would be higher, was not the issue. This general position is also found in Schumpeter's History, where it is expressed in harsh terms: 'As presented in the first edition, [the theory] clearly was intended to mean that population was actually and inevitably increasing faster than subsistence and that this was the reason for the misery observed. The geometrical and arithmetical ratios of these increases, to which Malthus like earlier writers seems to have attached considerable

14 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

importance, as well as his other attempts at mathematical precision, are nothing but faulty expressions of this view which can be passed by here in the remark that there is of course no point whatever in trying to formulate independent "laws" for the behavior of two interdependent quantities. The performance as a whole is deplorable in technique and little short of foolish in substance ...' (1954, 579). Schumpeter cites Cannan to the effect that the Essay (the second edition as well as the first) 'falls to the ground as an argument, and remains only a chaos of facts collected to illustrate the effect of laws which do not exist.' Moreover, he (like Cannan) distinguishes Malthus fromJ.S. Mill in that the latter 'put the law of population into a relation to the "law" of diminishing returns from land - which ... was entirely absent from Malthus' Essay ...' (581). J.S. Mill himself attributed diminishing returns to Malthus and discounted the significance of the ratios, as such: 'I ask, then, is it true, or not, that if their numbers [agricultural labourers] were fewer they would obtain higher wages? This is the question, and no other: and it is idle to divert attention from it, by attacking any incidental position of Malthus or some other writer, and pretending that to refute it, is to disprove the principle of population. Some, for instance, have achieved an easy victory over a passing remark of Mr. Malthus, hazarded chiefly byway of illustration, that the increase of food may perhaps be assumed to take place in an arithmetical ratio, while population increases in a geometrical: when every candid reader knows that Mr. Malthus laid no stress on this unlucky attempt to give numerical precision to things which do not admit of it, and every person capable of reasoning must see that it is wholly superfluous to his argument' (1848/1965, II, 353). Subsequently, W.S. Jevons understood the ratios themselves as referring to diminishing returns: 'It is a mistake to suppose that [the arithmetic series] can be altogether true or that Malthus can really have meant it to be accurate. I take it to be merely a rough way of saying that food cannot be increased much without a great increase of difficulty; or, in other words, that the increase of food is not proportional to the increase of labour' (1972-81, VI, 57). And Alfred Marshall (1920, I79n) took a similar view. He cited Malthus's rule for food production, which he read as holding good upon the assumption of a population doubling every twenty-five years: 'Let us then take this for our rule, though certainly far beyond the truth; and allow that [by great exertion] the whole produce of the Island might be increased every twenty-five years, by a quantity of subsistence equal to what it at present produces' (1798/1986, I, 12).' Marshall was a little critical of Malthus's 'habit' of speaking of production as capable of increasing in an arithmetic ratio, but took it to entail no more than a convenient way of expressing the maximum any reason-

l Marshall actually cites the third edition. The words in square brackets here ('by great exertion') appear in the first edition.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 15

able critic would require. More important: 'What [Malthus] meant, stated in modern language, was that the tendency of diminishing return, which is assumed throughout this argument, would begin to operate sharply after the produce of the island had been doubled. Doubled labour might give double produce; but quadrupled labour would hardly treble it: octupled labour would not quadruple it.' The Marshallian view has been reiterated more recently by Lionel Robbins: 'I do not think that [Cannan] was right. Admittedly, the mere comparison of geometrical and arithmetical potentialities of increase does not of itself necessarily involve this relationship [the law of diminishing returns]. But the idea underlying the comparison is of the same order of conceptions; and it is surely no mere coincidence that in another connection Malthus [1815] was one of the first to formulate the so-called law' (1970, 60). 'Surely it is odd to contend in the light of the essay on Rent,' Robbins noted in another context, 'that not the least suspicion of it had crossed his mind at the time when his main population theory was developed' (88). In some modern formulations the link between the ratios and diminishing returns is said to be implicit only, but yet specific enough to be formulated mathematically. Thus Stigler: 'Malthus' ratios implicitly assumed sharply diminishing returns, for his numbers define the production function where L is labor (proportional to population) and P is produce' (1965, 163; see also Lloyd, 1969). Written in this form, population is formally treated as a function of output - we shall see that this is indeed characteristic of Malthus's formulation; but it would be more familiar to us if rewritten as

such that, as population rises to achieve levels of i, 2, 4, 8, 16 ..., so in consequence produce grows to achieve levels of i, 2, 3, 4, 5, ..., implying a sharply concave total-production curve. This perspective has been adopted by Waterman (1987), who bases a mathematical interpretation of aspects of the growth pattern implicit in the first Essay on the premise that 'the putatively "arithmetical" increase of the "means of subsistence" is conditional upon a "geometrical" increase in population' (260; also 1991, 264, and 1992, 205-6).2 The passage upon

d InN dF 2 If —-77— = n, then -77 = h, where N is labour per period, and F is food per period. This is modified subsequently to relate output to doses of labour and capital: 'It was Malthus's central contribution to argue that if successive "doses" of the composite

16 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

which this view is based falls within the context used by Marshall: 'In the next twenty-five years [i.e., period 2], it is impossible to suppose that produce could be quadrupled. It would be contrary to all our knowledge of the qualities of the land. The very utmost that we can conceive, is, that the increase in the second twenty-five years might equal present produce. Let us then take this for our rule, though certainly far beyond the truth ... [This] ratio of increase is evidently arithmetical. It may be fairly said, therefore, that the means of subsistence increase in an arithmetical ratio' (1798/1986, /, 12; see also 68). I myself am on record as ascribing to the view that 'the key to the first essay is to be found in the principle of diminishing returns' (Hollander, 1986, igon). But a close rereading of the Essay indicates that the matter is far more complex than I ever imagined. There is good reason for the extraordinary disparity between the interpretations we have reviewed.

Our study of the first Essay in this chapter proceeds as follows. Section II takes up the issue of the geometric and arithmetic ratios. The evidence seems overwhelmingly to favour the Cannan-Schumpeter position. There is little justification for reading into the ratios a tight functional dependency of the type envisaged by Stigler and Waterman, or even the less formal dependency envisaged by Marshall and Robbins. The point, we shall show in section III, which takes up an application of the contrasting ratios to Godwin's idealistic scheme, is that quadrupled labour might yield quadrupled product if appropriate preparatory investments are made in land improvement or other forms of real-capital accumulation before the higher rate of application of labour is undertaken. And the fact that average product would not necessarily fall with increased population density is immaterial to the polemical purpose of the essay, which is satisfied by demonstrating the necessity for a reduction of the population growth rate below its maximum potential. This conclusion is supported by the discussion of the Poor Law institution (section IV). To deny that the ratios turn on the principle of diminishing returns is not, however, to deny the presence of that principle in the Essay. This indeed is a major source of difficulty in interpretation, for the possibility must be faced that concepts found within the confines of a single essay were not necessarily intended to be combined into a single whole by the author. In sections V and VI, we show that the principle of diminishing

factor are applied to the vector or "profile" of land at a geometrically increasing rate, then output will increase only arithmetically' (261). On this matter see below, p. 24. For a mathematical critique of the Stigler—Waterman perspectives on Malthus's production function, see Pullen and Baldry, 1988.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 17

returns does manifest itself, indeed conspicuously so, in the first Essay. Here, indeed, we find the origin of Malthus's formal growth model involving a declining path of real wages in consequence of a decelerating rate of growth of labour demand. On this view, while Malthus's ratios constitute a wholly polemical device with little analytical content, there is much worthwhile economics elsewhere in the Essay. Still lacking is an explicit analysis of the profit rate and its secular course. Moreover, it is not a simple application to land of labour and capital that is involved, but application entailing land 'improvement.' In section VII we consider Malthus's analysis in 1798 of the contemporary British situation. The 'model' here applied is not the land-scarcity version - that related specifically to die case of new colonies. Rather, the picture is one of very slow growth of population and food, proceeding for centuries at roughly constant real wages and driven by periodic bursts of new technology. The analysis of the British case is undertaken with an eye to explaining what Malthus considered to be the surprisingly slow growth of population; that is, there is no question of excessive population growth, as Schumpeter has it. The implications for population growth of the distribution of activity between agriculture and manufactures is the topic of section VIII, particularly a criticism of Adam Smith for identifying increased aggregate labour demand with increased national 'revenue or stock' rather than with expanded agricultural output. Section IX considers a celebrated discussion of wage oscillations during the course of growth, and its relation to the growth model. At this point we take leave of the first Essay. In sections X and XI, the 1803 and 1806 versions of the Essay are taken up, again with particular reference to the role accorded to diminishing returns. The first of these two sections documents a reinforcement and refinement of the technical apparatus involving a decline in average agricultural product per capita with increased population density, and a falling real wage towards subsistence and correspondingly reduced population growth. The common opinion that the formulation of this diminishing-returns principle constitutes a novelty introduced to counter references by James Anderson (1801) to a form of increasing returns is questioned in the light of the earlier statements of 1798. Also, as in 1798, the major concern remains the impossibility of food increasing at a rate comparable to that of population growth when unchecked, necessitating reduction of the latter below its maximum potential - a proposition that is consistent with constant average productivity upon increase in population density, provided sufficient time is allowed prior to the increased application. None the less, the existence of the more formal case based on reduced productivity should not be downplayed. Contemporary application is another matter entirely. The picture of British growth given in 1803 contrasts radically with that of 1798 - and with the more formal growth model - for it involves acceleration of food supply and population growth.

18 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

Section XI considers an appendix of 1806 designed to correct misconceptions regarding the Essay. The emphasis is wholly on the proposition that land scarcity constrains the population growth rate below its maximum, without, however, having recourse to the diminishing-returns concept involving falling per-capita output with increased population density. Modifications made in the 1803 and 1806 editions to the original account of wage oscillations are the subject of section XII. The reader is asked to bear in mind the technical orientation of this chapter; the Essay is placed in a broader intellectual context in chapters 18 and 19. Moreover, there is this difference between the first and later versions: In 1798, population economics was incidental to a concern to justify private-property institutions against Jacobinism, whereas, in 1803 and thereafter, it came into its own. II

THE 'GEOMETRICAL' AND 'ARITHMETICAL' RATIOS3

On the basis of the two celebrated postulates (indeed, 'laws of nature') 'that food is necessary to the existence of man' and 'that the passion between the sexes is necessary, and will remain nearly in its present state' (1798/1986, /, 8) - Mai thus asserts 'that the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power of the earth to produce subsistence for man' (9) with obvious consequences: 'Population when unchecked, increases in

3 Malthus made no claims to priority for the formal ratios. By 1798 they had a pedigree. See on this Rashid, 1988, 62; Hartwick, 1988; and Schumpeter, 1954, 254f. As for the 'principle' of population itself, Malthus paid tribute to a variety of authors in a retrospective account in 1803: 'The only authors from whose writings I had deduced the principle, which formed the main argument of the Essay, were Hume, Wallace, Adam Smith, and Dr. Price; and my object was to apply it, to try the truth of those speculations on the perfectibility of man and society, which at that time [1798] excited a considerable portion of the public attention' (1986, 2, i). Waterman has made the case that 'virtually the whole of Malthus's population theory is to be found in Paley's brief exposition ... including strong hints of Malthus's own phraseology. Nature has provided for "an indefinite multiplication" of the human, as of all other species. Under favourable conditions, population doubles in twenty (not twenty-five) years. There is a "tendency" to continual increase; but this is countered by "checks" to population. It is "the constitution of the sexes" that affords the stimulus to population, provided males do not indulge in "irregular gratifications." Marriage is the chief cause of population, but "men will not marry" unless they can expect "that mode of subsistence to which each class ... is accustomed." And when living standards rise (and remain high for long enough), there is a ratchet effect upon the sociallydetermined "subsistence" requirement: for "habitual superfluities become actual wants'" (l996b). See also Waterman on Paley's discussion of the preventive check 'which is almost certainly the chief source of Malthus's concept.' In considering this case, it is perhaps noteworthy that Malthus neglected to mention Paley among writers to whom he was originally indebted for the 'principle of population' or among those of whom he became aware after 1798 (see 1986, 2, ii). There is a further problem: Waterman allows that Paley lacked a theory of production, though such a theory is crucial to Malthusian population analysis.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 19

a geometrical ratio. Subsistence only in an arithmetical ratio. A slight acquaintance with numbers will shew the immensity of the first power in comparison of the second. By the law of our nature, which makes food necessary to the life of man, the effects of these two unequal powers must be kept equal. This implies a strong and constantly operating check on population from the difficulty of subsistence. This difficulty must fall somewhere; and must necessarily be severely felt by a large portion of mankind.'4 Mai thus extends his notion of a high potential of human population growth to the animal and vegetable worlds, and points out that these too are in actuality constrained. In this passage the constraints on population growth reflect lack of space as well as of food: Through the animal and vegetable kingdoms, nature has scattered the seeds of life abroad with the most profuse and liberal hand. She has been comparatively sparing in the room and the nourishment necessary to rear them.' Various elaborations in the second chapter of the Essay involve a doubling of population every twenty-five years as maximum growth rate, or approximately 3 per cent annually, drawn from contemporary American data. Even this, Malthus allowed, fell short of the situation, 'where the means of subsistence were so abundant, that no part of the society could have any fears about providing amply for a family, the power of population being left to assert itself unchecked' (11). In such an ideal situation 'the increase of the human species evidendy would be much greater than any increase that has been hitherto known.' For no state had ever existed 'where the manners were so pure and simple, and the means of subsistence so abundant, that no check whatever has existed to early marriage ... in no state that we have known, has the power of population been left to assert itself with perfect freedom.' Although the American data illustrate a growth rate falling short of the maximum theoretically conceivable, Malthus nevertheless took it as his 'rule' because it had been experienced in actuality: This ratio of increase, though short of the utmost power of population, yet as the result of actual experience, we will take as our rule; and say, that population, when unchecked, goes on doubling itself every twenty five years, or increases in a geometrical ratio' (12). Malthus then turns to a completely different geographical location to illustrate his arithmetic rate of food expansion - namely, Britain. Here he takes as his 'rule' equal increments of output every twenty-five years, setting out from the 'present state of cultivation,' albeit a growth rate 'far beyond the truth,' assuming as it does 'the best possible policy ... the breaking up more land, and ... great encouragements to agriculture.' The arithmetic 4 It emerges that 'misery' includes the fear of low standards and the necessity for delayed marriage as well as low standards as such (see section VII, below, on the 'preventive' vs the 'positive' check). It may be helpful to perceive of 'unchecked' populaton growth as the rate generated in communistic schemes proposing inter alia the abolition of the family unit, thereby reducing the private marginal cost of producing offspring to zero. On this perspective, see section III, below, and also chapter 18: IV.

20 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

rate of increase per twenty-five-year period is, in short, an overestimate, again adopted for the sake of argument: 'In the next twenty five years, it is impossible to suppose that the produce could be quadrupled. It would be contrary to all our knowledge of the qualities of land. The very utmost that we can conceive, is, that the increase in the second twenty five years might equal the present produce. Let us then take this for our rule, though certainly far from the truth; and allow that by great exertion, the whole produce of the Island might be increased every twenty five years, by a quantity of subsistence equal to what it at present produces. The most enthusiastic speculator cannot suppose a greater increase than this. In a few centuries it would make every acre of land in the Island like a garden.' This 'ratio of increase,' Malthus declares with a straight face, 'is evidently arithmetical,' just as the posited U.S. population growth rate is evidently geometrical. But clearly nothing depends upon the arithmetic versus geometric dimensions per se. It adds nothing to point out that a (supposed) doubling of population every twenty-five years constitutes a geometric rate of growth, and an expansion of food supplies by equal increments during the same period constitutes an arithmetic rate of growth. In any event, food supplies could never, in practice, Malthus allowed, grow at the specific arithmetic rate posited; and population growth, in contrast, would, if truly 'unrestricted,' exceed the posited geometric rate. What matters is that an (overestimated) maximum growth rate of British or world food supply falls short of an (underestimated) maximum growth rate of population.5 Malthus next combines the two rates. Assuming that, in 1800, an output of X units of food 'is equal to support' 7 million - the initial situation — it follows that, by 1850, a food output of 3X will suffice for only 21 million, leaving 7 million 'unprovided for,' and so forth (see table 1.1). To generalize (and avoid the issue of emigration), Malthus applies his rules to the world as a whole.6 In 2,000 years (by A.D. 3800) 'the difference would be almost incalculable, though the produce in that time would have increased to an immense extent' (13).

5 Even a geometric rate, of course, may imply a small absolute population increase, and an arithmetic rate large absolute increases of food over periods which are reasonable to consider. 6 He assumes that 'the restraints to population [are] universally removed' and that 'the subsistence for man that the earth affords [is] increased every twenty-five years by a quantity equal to what the whole world at present produces' (13). The latter assumption is said to imply that 'the power of production in the earth [is] absolutely unlimited, and its rate of increase much greater than we can conceive that any possible exertions of mankind could make it.' This rule yields the following result:

Population Food

1800

2025

2100

l l

512 10

4,096 13

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 21 TABLE 1.1 Summary of Geometric and Arithmetic Ratios

Population (m) Food supply 'Equal to support of (m) 'Unprovided for' (m) [% unprovided for]

1800

1825

1850

1875

1900

1925

7

14 2X 14 0 0

28 3X 21 7 25

56 4X 28 28 50

112 5X 35 77 68

224 6X 42 182 81

X

7 0 0

It is unconvincing to argue that, by all this, Malthus intended to define, even crudely, a technical relation between population growth (as 'cause') and agricultural output (as 'effect'), such that if population grows at a geometric rate, then food supply grows at an arithmetic rate. The two rates - one an underestimate deriving from the American case, the other an overestimate of British and world potentials - are allowed for the sake of argument; but how technically the arithmetic growth rate of food production would be achieved is simply not entered into, except in such loose suggestions as implied by the reference to 'great encouragements to agriculture' (above, p. 19). (Change in the workforce is, presumably, at play, but as one among various unidentified variables.) Thus, in his universalist example, according to which in 2,OOO years the difference between population and food would be 'incalculable,' the conclusion is that the population growth rate would in fact necessarily be kept down to the food growth rate, with the latter still assumed to proceed at the arithmetic pace: 'No limits whatever are placed to the production of the earth; they may increase forever and be greater than any assignable power; yet still the power of population being a power of a superior order, the increase of the human species can only be kept commensurate to the increase of the means of subsistence, by the strong law of necessity acting as a check upon the greater power.' There is no hint here that cutting the population growth rate will play back on the rate of food supply; the latter is assumed given, and the former has to come into line with it. And even if we are meant to take for granted some reduction in the food growth rate, there is no indication whatsoever regarding the precise technical relation entailed. Bringing the rates together, as Malthus does so conspicuously, is a polemical device designed to emphasize that - except in the special case of North America — actual population growth is constrained to the lower rate imposed by the growth of food supply, leading on to an analysis of the operative 'checks' over time and space; and to a warning against the artificial encouragement of population growth beyond the rate of growth of food.7 The combination of the two rates does not seem to have the

7 On this perspective see also Rashid, 1988, 6l.

22 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

analytical implication that, with population growing at a 'geometric ratio,' food will (in consequence) grow only at an 'arithmetic ratio.' Ill

THE CRITIQUE OF WILLIAM GODWIN

In analysing the proposals in Godwin's Enquiry Concerning Political Justice (2d ed., 1796), Malthus takes the likely population growth rate to be a doubling per twenty-five-year period, or 3 per cent annually - again an underestimate.8 The estimate for the food supply is, as before, taken to be equal increments per twenty-five-year period, starting from the current British base. It is a deliberate overestimate, which, like the underplaying of population growth, is adopted to weigh the case against himself, and so avoid any charge of exaggeration. The Godwin system would entail 'extraordinary encouragements of population' with 'every cause of depopulation ... removed,' so that 'the numbers would necessarily increase faster than in any society that has ever yet been known' (1798/1986, /, 68). These encouragements include the absence of war, of 'unwholesome trades and manufactures,' of 'pestilent cities,' and of 'drinking, gaming and debauchery'; clean and roomy housing, spaced well apart; 'equality'; and the absence of 'luxury,' that is, of a manufacturing or a service sector. Also assumed are schemes ensuring the 'amicable' sharing of agricultural tasks and the distribution of output 'according to wants' (66-7). Abolition of marriage is contemplated. While there would still be a natural inclination for men and women to continue to live in individual partnerships, it 'would be of little consequence ... how many children a woman had, or to whom they belonged. Provisions and assistance would spontaneously flow from the quarter in which they abounded, to the quarter that was deficient.' As for education, 'every man would be ready to furnish instruction to the rising generation according to his capacity.' Under such conditions - which include the abolition of the private cost of a family, that is, a zero private marginal cost of producing offspring it might actually be expected that population would double itself in periods of less than fifteen years, though, as mentioned, Malthus accepts a twenty-five-year period, since such had been experienced in the northern states as a whole.9 With the assumptions listed above - Malthus reiterates especially an equal distribution of property and the devotion of all labour to agriculture - output of food would certainly rise, but at a slower rate than would population: 'To meet the demand of a population increasing so rapidly' at least one-half of each labourer's time would be required to

8 This at least is the rate allowed initially, for the whole point of the argument is that such a rate could not long be maintained. 9 England, being 'naturally healthier,' might be expected to achieve an even higher population growth rate in the absence of any checks.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 23

be devoted to agriculture (rather than a half-hour per day, as maintained by Godwin). Even so, 'with such, or much greater exertions, a person who is acquainted with the nature of the soil in this country, and who reflects on the fertility of the lands already in cultivation, and the barrenness of those that are not cultivated, will be very much disposed to doubt, whether the whole average produce could possibly be doubled in twenty five years from the present period' (68). An outside possibility of doubling food output in the first period is allowed if a meat diet is abandoned and grazing land ploughed up; but even this outcome is improbable since 'the soil of England will not produce much without dressing; and cattle seem to be necessary to make that species of manure, which best suits the land ...' But assuming that a doubling of (a largely vegetable) food supply could be achieved, that is, a supply sufficient to 'support in health' a population of 14 million, a second doubling to meet the (supposedly given) requirements of 28 million was inconceivable; even increasing food supplies in the second period by an equal increment was unlikely - again the arithmetic increase starting from the current base was an outside or extreme hypothesis taking account of both the intensive and the extensive margins of expansion: 'During the next period of doubling, where will the food be found to satisfy the importunate demands of the increasing numbers? Where is the fresh land to turn up? Where is the dressing necessary to improve that which is already in cultivation? There is no person with the smallest knowledge of land, but would say, that it was impossible that the average produce of the country could be increased during the second twenty five years by a quantity equal to what it at present yields' (69). As in the general case, by the end of the second period (1850) there would be 7 million 'unprovided for' out of 28 million, and within fifty years the initially established system of 'just laws' and 'benevolence' would end in 'violence, oppression, falsehood, misery, hateful vice, and distress' (70).10 10 The polemical nature of the entire exercise is confirmed by the very fact that the posited 'geometrical' growth rate - the twenty-five-year period of progression - could not long be maintained: 'I am sufficiently aware that the redundant 28 million, or 77 million, that I have mentioned, could never have existed ...' (70). Indeed, Malthus cited Godwin himself to the effect that 'population is perpetually kept down to the level of the means of subsistence,' a reference to the 'degree of misery, the necessary and inevitable result of the laws of nature ...' The full case against the idealists is that excessive population growth under communism will be checked by the collapse of living standards, a collapse which generates social chaos and leads to the abandonment of the experiment: 'It seems highly probable ... that an administration of property, not very different from that which prevails in civilized States at present, would be established, as the best, though inadequate remedy, for the evils which were pressing on the society' (72). Similarly with regard to the marriage institution: The initial abandonment thereof- and community assurance that children would be provided for - would generate a rate of population increase that could not conceivably be met by food supplies. A restitution of individual responsibility for children is predicted as a check to population growth.

24 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

The remark that, with one-half of each worker's time 'or much greater exertions,' an equal increment of produce per twenty-five-year period could scarcely be imagined is subsequently reinforced by the assertion that, even were 'the whole attention and labour' of society devoted to agriculture, the constraint on food supply would apply, and this notwithstanding 'every other encouragement' conceivable: 'The powers of the earth would be absolutely inadequate to produce food for the population that would inevitably ensue; ... even, if the whole attention and labour of the society were directed to this sole point, and if, by the most perfect security of property, and every other encouragement that could be thought of, the greatest possible increase of produce were yearly obtained; yet still, the increase of food would by no means keep pace with the much more rapid increase of population' (72). What emerges in all this for the production function? It is a feature of the argument that the constraints imposed on the growth rate of food derive not only from scarce land,11 but also from scarce real capital: 'the soil of England will not produce much without dressing'; 'where is the dressing necessary to improve that which is already in cultivation.' This fact is important, having in mind an interesting observation by Waterman regarding Malthus's 'production function': 'Seed-corn, cottages, barns, horses, wagons, ploughs, and tools are required by an expanding population employed on the land. Malthus must be assuming that new entrants to the work-force come equipped with these goods, else it could be argued against him that falling average product was caused by (remediable) capital-scarcity and hence his polemic would fail. I therefore take it that Samuelson [1978, 1415-16] is correct in stating that "the classicists in effect assume that output is produced by a production function involving land input and a dose of labour-cwm-capital input." It was Malthus's central contribution to argue that if successive "doses" of die composite factor are applied to the vector or "profile" of land at a geometrically increasing rate, then output will increase only arithmetically' (1987, 261; see also 1991, 266). But this is not the case, at least in the first Essay, which is explicit that capital scarcity plays a key role in constraining the growth of food supply. As for Malthus's polemical purpose, this can be easily appreciated, provided we read it as relating specifically to temporal rates of change. Thus conceivably capital scarcity is remediable, but only if sufficient time is allowed. Should the population growth rate be appropriately reduced, it might then be possible to achieve a proportionate advance of food, thus

On the 'stability' of the system, the re-establishment of private-property institutions after their abandonment, see Waterman, 1991, ch. 2. 11 In the sense of limited fertility - 'the fertility of the lands already in cultivation, and the barrenness of those that are not cultivated' - and in an absolute sense - 'where is the fresh land to turn up?'

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 25

avoiding any fall in output per capita.12 That average product would not necessarily fall with increased population density is immaterial to the polemical purpose, which is satisfied merely by demonstrating the requirement for a reduction of the population growth rate below its maximum potential. In the general account it had appeared that Mai thus merely 'superimposed' the ratios, as it were, treating them as independent; a variation in the growth rate of population would then leave the arithmetic food increase unchanged (see above, pp. 21-2). In the critique of Godwin, the matter is a little more complex. I have in mind an extension of the polemic, involving a fifteen-year rather than a twenty-five-year geometric increase of population in the event that Godwin's scheme were established 'in its utmost perfection,' which allows - always as an outside possibility, for the sake of argument - food-supply increases by equal absolute increments from the initial base in the shorter period (1798/1986, I, 75). An increase in the population growth rate thus raises the food growth rate, with the scheme collapsing, as before, by the end of the second period: 'If then we were to take the period of doubling at fifteen, instead of twenty five years; and reflect upon the labour necessary to double the produce in so short a time, even if we allow it possible; we may venture to pronounce with certainty, that ... not thirty years could elapse, before its utter destruction from the simple principle of population.' Although it is implied that an increase in the population growth rate has an impact on the growth of food supplies, this extension does not establish any strict functional relation between growth of population at a geometric rate (as an independent variable) and growth of food at an arithmetic rate (as a dependent variable). Malthus was rather engaged in an exercise involving erasure of the comparative ratios applied to a twentyfive-year period and their replacement by the same ratios applied to a fifteen-year period, with the outcome that the scheme collapses within thirty rather than fifty years. The extension sheds no new light on Malthus's conception of the production function. To reiterate the point: The device of geometric-arithmetic ratios used in the polemic against the idealists does not necessarily turn on a declining product per capita with increasing population density. IV APPLICATION TO THE POOR LAWS

The discussion of the Poor Laws is relevant to the nature of the production function. Summing up their impact, Malthus writes of 'the first obvious 12 A passage in the 1803 edition (1986, 3, 488-9) relating to a 'plan' to check population growth and allow preliminary investment in land preparation points directly to this conclusion; see also 458, on capital scarcity as an impediment to agricultural expansion (below, p. 56).

26 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

tendency [which] is to increase population without increasing the food for its support,' a reference to the encouragement given by money grants to imprudent marriages (1798/1986, /, 33). This puts upward pressure on food prices to the detriment of those who are not supported, leading them also to require support. The Poor Laws thus 'in some measure create the poor which they maintain.'13 What is the reason for the zero (or negligible) response of food to net increases in demand? Malthus expands on this matter in an allusion to marginal extensions in 'old' countries: 'It should be remembered always, that there is an essential difference between food, and those wrought commodities, the raw materials of which are in great plenty. A demand for these last will not fail to create them in as great a quantity as they are wanted. The demand for food has by no means the same creative power. In a country where all the fertile spots have been seized, high offers are necessary to encourage the farmer to lay his dressing on land, from which he cannot expect a profitable return for some years. And before the prospect of advantage is sufficiently great to encourage this sort of agricultural enterprise, and while the new produce is rising, great distresses may be suffered from the want of it. The demand for an increased quantity of subsistence is, with few exceptions, constant every where, yet we see how slowly it is answered in all countries that have been long occupied' (35). In this passage we seem to have what was to be the basic difference between manufactured and agricultural products so characteristic of nineteenth-century classicism. Yet the matter is far from clear. Diminishing returns of a secular order would imply that, at larger population sizes — or because of permanent increases in the demand for food for whatever reason — per-capita output falls, and food prices rise. Yet this is not Malthus's conclusion. The 'distress' is temporary, lasting only 'while the new produce is rising.' It may be fair, therefore, to attribute to him a form of short-term diminishing productivity, whereas if enough time is allowed for land preparation and the like, constant productivity will be the rule; what is involved is investment to overcome rising real costs. This is precisely the conclusion reached in our analysis of the geometric and arithmetic ratios as applied to Godwin's scheme.14

13 Apart from money-wage supplements, there is also the matter of support in workhouses. Food grants to inmates would reduce the amount available outside, putting upward pressure on prices. Similarly, Malthus wrote of Pitt's Poor Law proposal that it 'possesses in a high degree the great and radical defect of all systems of the kind, that, of tending to increase population without increasing the means for its support, and thus to depress the condition of those who are not supported by parishes, and consequently, to create more poor' (36). 14 Malthus leaves the final impression that ultimately food-supply constraints can be over

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 27 V

DIMINISHING RETURNS AND LAND SCARCITY-BASED GROWTH THEORY

Mai thus's arithmetic growth rate implies that there are no absolute limits to agricultural production: 'If the subsistence of man that the earth affords was to be increased every twenty five years by a quantity equal to what the whole world at present produces; this would allow the power of production in the earth to be absolutely unlimited, and its rate of increase much greater than we can conceive that any possible exertions of mankind could make it ... No limits are placed to the productions of the earth; they may increase for ever and be greater than any assignable quantity ...' (1798/1986, /, 13). Similarly: 'All this time we are supposing the produce of the earth absolutely unlimited, and the yearly increase greater than the boldest speculator can imagine' (70). This points away from diminishing returns, at least any version of the principle that implies a maximum total output.15 (The arithmetic rate of increase implies, of course, a declining percentage increase. Mai thus does not seem to concern himself with this characteristic.) But if we have in mind that the arithmetic increase is an outside estimate assumed for the sake of argument - a maximum Malthus did not believe could be achieved - the door may be left open for absolute limits, though such allowance was not needed for Mai thus's response to the Utopians, which relates entirely to comparative rates of change.16 For even were the growth rate of food to be greater under Godwin's scheme than under private property (as Malthus believed would be the case, as we show later, in chapter 18, p. 910), the difference between birth rate - in a system where the private marginal cost of a family is zero - and food supply would be sufficient to establish his case. Our next task is to take account of passages where the notion of an absolute limit to food supplies is explicidy recognized. It is in these contexts that there emerges most clearly the notion that, as population density

come. This is a weaker conclusion than the one reached earlier in the chapter namely, that the impact of the Poor Laws on food supplies would be negligible. These perspectives might be partly reconciled if we assume ongoing artificially stimulated population growth; then there would be a 'permanant' lag in food supplies. We must exercise caution in another respect. Malthus did not believe that the Poor Law institution, as it was organized in practice, had much stimulated population growth (see below, p. 36). 15 But Waterman (1991, 267-8), in his rational reconstruction of Malthus, insists on the compatibility of diminishing returns and the absence of 'limits,' that is, a positive slope to the total product curve whatever the magnitude of the variable factor, the marginal product approaching the x-axis asymptotically. 16 Even in this context, however, there are to be found loose allusions to an ultimate maximum to food supply. Thus: 'I have already pointed out the error of supposing that no distress and difficulty would arise from an overcharged population before the earth absolutely refused to produce any more' (66).

28 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

rises, so per-capita output and the real wage fall, ultimately leading to stationariness of population. One such statement will be found in a letter to Godwin written shortly after the appearance of the Essay. 'Could we suppose any country by the most extraordinary exertions, to arrive at the neplus ultra of subsistence and population, in one or two centuries we have reason to think that the pressure of population in its utmost weight would be felt in frequent famines and pestilences, and particularly in the small recompense of labour; for I think you yourself must allow that under the present form of society the real recompense of labour depends upon the increase of the funds for its maintenance; and, when these funds are completely stationary and have continued so some time, this recompense will naturally be the least possible' (20 August 1798; cited in Bonar, 1926, iv). We consider from this perspective - it is a Smithian perspective, in fact — a series of chapters in the first Essay dealing with aspects of the population problem in 'civilized nations' as a whole, in England, and in North America. Chapter IV of the Essay (1798) commences with a declaration relating absolute population size to absolute food supplies: The reason that the greater part of Europe is more populous now than it was in former times, is, that the industry of the inhabitants has made these countries produce a greater quantity of human subsistence. For, I conceive, that, it may be laid down as a position not to be controverted, that, taking a sufficient extent of territory to include within it exportation and importation; and allowing some variation for the prevalence of luxury, or of frugal habits; that population constantly bears a regular proportion to the food the earth is made to produce' (1798/1986, /, 23-4). Malthus next proceeds to a contemporary debate regarding 'the populousness of ancient nations,' remarking that the argument would be resolved 'could it be clearly ascertained that the average [i.e., total, extracting from seasonal or other fluctuations] produce of the countries in question, taken altogether, is greater now than it was in the time of Julius Caesar.' That contemporary China has an 'immense' population is indicated by the facts of a very great food output and a very low per-capita income: 'When we are assured that China is the most fertile country in the world; that almost all the land is in tillage; and that a great part of it bears two crops a year; and further that the people live very frugally, we may infer with certainty, that the population must be immense ..."7 This theme is elaborated in a criticism of Hume's Essay on the Popu-

17 Malthus did not commit himself to Adam Smith's view that the Chinese population was stationary, only that 'it certainly seems very little probable that the population of China is fast increasing' (25). Evidence of this was derived from the supposition that 'every acre of land has been so long in cultivation that we can hardly conceive there is any great yearly addition to the average [i.e., total] produce.'

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 29

lousness of Ancient and Modern Nations, where Malthus insists on the need to distinguish between growth rates and absolute size of population. Specifically, he rejects Hume's theme that the record of early marriage and low celibacy in ancient times indicates a large absolute population, and that of high celibacy and late marriage in modern nations a smaller population: 'If I find that at a certain period in ancient history, the encouragements to have a family were great, that early marriages were consequently very prevalent, and that few persons remained single, I should infer with certainty that population was rapidly increasing, but by no means that it was then actually very great; rather, indeed, the contrary, that it was then thin, and that there was room and food for a much greater number. On the other hand, if I find that at this period the difficulties attending a family were very great; that, consequently, few early marriages took place, and that a great number of both sexes remained single, I infer with certainty that population was at a stand; and, probably, because the actual population was very great in proportion to the fertility of the land, and that there was scarcely room and food for more' (24-5). We have here the twofold notion that population growth depends on the magnitude of per-capita income, which in turn is governed by the population/land ratio. The latter relationship is suggested by the reference to 'room and food for a much greater number' at low absolute population sizes (always relative to land),18 and to situations of very great absolute populations, where there is 'scarcely room and food for more,' implying low per-capita income. In the limit, population is 'at a stand'; conversely, it is presumably a high per-capita income at low absolute populations that provides the great 'encouragements to have a family.' The related notions of reduced per-capita output at higher absolute population sizes (with a minimum to earnings and a corresponding maximum to population size) and of a deceleration of population growth with increase in population density are applied in an analysis of North American development (Chapter VI). There, because of high per-capita income in consequence of low population density, the growth rate of population was extremely high, which is to say that the 'checks' are removed: 'It has been universally remarked, that all new colonies setded in healthy countries, where there was plenty of room and food, have constantly increased with astonishing rapidity in their population ... the European settlements in the new world bear ample testimony to the truth of [the] remarks ... A plenty of rich land, to be had for little or nothing, is so powerful a cause of population, as to overcome all other obstacles ...' (39). There follows an important statement describing the effect initially on per-capita output, and secondari-

18 There is, however, an important qualification. Populations were sometimes stationary in 'thinly inhabited' countries (25) because of low per-capita income, reflecting what we would call the 'poverty trap' (see below, p. 54).

30 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

ly on the population growth rate, of a reduction in absolute population size: 'Whatever was the original number of British emigrants that increased so fast in the North American colonies; let us ask, why does not an equal number produce an equal increase, in the same time, in Great Britain? The great and obvious cause to be assigned, is, the want of room and food, or, in other words, misery; and that this is a much more powerful cause even than vice, appears sufficiently evident from the rapidity with which even old states recover the desolations of war, pestilence, or the accidents of nature. They are then for a short time placed a little in the situation of new states; and the effect is always answerable to what might be expected. If the industry of the inhabitants be not destroyed by fear or tyranny, subsistence will soon increase beyond the wants of the reduced numbers; and the invariable consequence will be, that population which before, perhaps, was nearly stationary, will begin immediately to increase' (41-2).19 The high rate of population increase of the United States could be maintained over time in so far as food supplies were able to keep up, as had indeed been the case: 'on account of the extreme cheapness of good land, a capital could not be more advantageously employed than in agriculture ...' (40); having in mind also the impact on agriculture of favourable institutions, the result was a population increase 'without parallel in history.'20 In local areas where diversions of labour to manufacturing and commerce were avoided ('the inhabitants applied themselves solely to agriculture, and luxury was not known'), the increase in the food growth rate was such as to permit the 'extraordinary' rate of population increase of doubling in fifteen years (41).

19 An important technical issue might be addressed at this point. Having in mind the later full-fledged Malthusian analysis of the growth process, there is a missing step in the account so far. For the growth rate of population turns, not directly on per-capita output, but on the wage, which is determined in the first instance by the growth rate of labour demand (identifiable for simplicity with the growth rate of 'food' (gK). It is gK that is the governing force, for it varies with the magnitude of per-capita income: the higher the latter, the higher at each given wage will be the profit rate, and therefore gK and the greater the stimulus to population growth (gL). It remains true that high (low) population growth is linked to high (low) per-capita income, and high (low) per-capita income to low (high) population density, but the first connection is mediated via the labour market; the higher per-capita income at a given wage, the higher the profit rate, and therefore the higher gK. It is this that puts upward pressure on the wage and encourages population growth. Although the labour market is not always formally discussed, we must suppose that such a market was presumed to exist in analyses of capitalist economies. That this is so emerges clearly in the North American analysis (see below, p. 34) with its discussion of a falling wage path. However, even there we find no discussion of the profit rate and its trend. 20 Malthus emphasized the positive effect of good laws and institutions on food expansion: internal free trade; 'liberty and equality'; 'alienation and division of property'; the legal requirement to develop land rather than leave it uncultivated; and a small tax burden.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 31

But in arguing thus, Malthus feared he had been led into a damaging concession. For apparently food supplies can increase at a rate equivalent to the geometric rate attributed to American population. His answer which unfortunately still insists formally on the geometric and arithmetic ratios - may be the first clear distinction in the literature between stocks and flows: In instances of this kind, the powers of the earth appear to be fully equal to answer all the demands for food that can be made upon it by man. But we should be led into an error, if we were thence to suppose that population and food ever really increase in the same ratio. The one is still geometrical and the other an arithmetical ratio, that is, one increases by multiplication, and the other by addition. Where there are few people, and a great quantity of fertile land, the power of the earth to afford a yearly increase of food may be compared to a great reservoir of water, supplied by a moderate stream. The faster population increases, the more help will be got to draw off the water, and consequently an increasing quantity will be taken every year. But the sooner, undoubtedly, will the reservoir be exhausted, and the streams only remain. When acre has been added to acre, till all the fertile land is occupied, the yearly increase of food will depend upon the amelioration of the land already in possession; and even this moderate stream will be gradually diminishing. But population, could it be supplied with food, would go on with unexhausted vigour, and the increase of one period would furnish the power of a greater increase the next, and this without any limit. (4in) 21

At low population/land ratios, the growth rate of food keeps up with the (maximum) growth rate of population. Once the land constraint is activated (when 'all fertile land is occupied') - how soon this occurs depends on how fast population is growing - the rate of growth of food falls, with increasing fractions of the (growing) labour supply diverted to 'ameliorate' land already in use.22 The deceleration of the food growth rate evidently plays back on population growth, for only if population can be appropriately supplied with food can it 'go on with unexhausted vigour.' To insist that food proceeds at an arithmetic rate ('by addition'), as Malthus does at the outset of the passage, implies constant absolute increments per period, whereas nothing in the account justifies this: Initially, the rate of increase of food is 'geometric' on a par with that of population, and subsequently it slackens, though little can be said regarding its precise course. (Quite possibly the absolute increases per period actually 21 This passage is cited by Bonar (1926, xx) as constituting the 'germ' of the diminishingreturns principle. So, too, is the passage on 1986, /, 68 (cited above, p. 23) but, as explained, that account provides inadequate proof. 22 This formulation confirms that the application of the variable factor incorporates land improvement; there is no sharp distinction between diminishing returns, given technology, and changes in technology.

32 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

decline.) And it is self-contradictory to insist on the geometric rate for population when at the same time it is allowed - this in fact is the object of the whole exercise - that the growth rate of population is increasingly constrained below its potential Malthus was grasping at straws by devising his simile in defence of the geometric and arithmetic ratios. He must have thought they were important to his case, but in this he seems to have been carried away. (But see Waterman, 1992, 205-6, for a more positive representation to the effect that, for Malthus, the ratios are activated only once land scarcity is encountered.)

In Chapter VII, Malthus goes farther in formulating a model of growth along the lines thus far outlined. It is highly suggestive of what, later on, he came to state with impressive precision - namely, the land scarcity based growth model. The argument, in the context of a comparison of British demographic data for two periods (Elizabethan to the midseventeenth century compared with late-seventeenth to mid-eighteenth century): 'Dr. Price thinks that the registers in the former period are not to be depended upon; but, probably, in this instance, they do not give incorrect proportions. At least, there are many reasons for expecting to find a greater excess of births above the burials in the former period than in the latter. In the natural progress of the population of any country, more good land will, ceteris paribus, be taken into cultivation in the earlier stages of it than in the later. And a greater proportional yearly increase of produce will invariably be followed by a greater proportional increase of population' (46—7).23 It is not made absolutely clear whether 'good land' is at all 'available' to be taken up at later stages of development, or whether the fraction of total land newly taken into cultivation that is 'good' declines. But, in either case, the passage alludes to an increasing scarcity (in some sense) of 'good' land, that is, to a decline in quality of land at the extensive margin, and to a more rapid increase in food production in early than in later stages of development, a differential evidently related to the increasing land scarcity. The more rapid rate of food production at early stages will be 'invariably followed' by a similarly rapid rate of population growth; and by implication (the context makes clear this was Malthus's intention), the subsequently

23 Malthus elaborated thus: 'I say ceteris paribus, because the increase of the produce of any country will always very greatly depend on the spirit of industry that prevails, and the ways in which it is directed. The knowledge and habits of the people and other temporary causes, particularly the degree of civil liberty and equality existing at the time, must always have great influence in existing and directing this spirit.' This qualification is in line with the introduction into his discussion of North American expansion of the legal and institutional framework: see above, note 20.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 33

decelerating growth rate of food production will be followed by a deceleration of population growth. VI

THE DOWNWARD WAGE PATH

Now if, in fact, the population growth rate (gL) decelerates in line with that of food (gF), then with gF = o, population growth, too, will cease. Such is the stationary state. Malthus, it is true, also alludes to the 'forcing' of population: 'The only true criterion of a real and permanent increase in the population, of any country, is the increase of the means of subsistence,' but in China 'the people have been habituated by degrees to live almost upon the smallest possible quantity of food. There must have been periods in such countries when population increased permanently without an increase in the means of subsistence' (1798/1986, /, 49). But the major European states (England and France) were not subject to this problem of excessive population growth.24 The data regarding birth and death rates indicated that 'population has accommodated itself, very nearly to the average produce of each country,' so that periodic plagues 'to repress what is redundant' are not a feature of the recent record (47). In short: 'The discouragements to marriage, the consequent vicious habits, war, luxury, the silent though certain depopulation of large towns, and the close habitations and insufficient food of many of the poor, prevent population from increasing beyond the means of subsistence.' It is the low real wage which discourages population growdi and ensures that it stays in line with the declining growth rate of food in the course of regular secular expansion. (Malthus is here assuming private property; under communism, the zero private marginal cost of a family precludes such adjustment, even if living standards are low.) Similarly, an acceleration of food production, by raising real wages, will encourage an appropriate population increase: 'The true reason [for workers refusing to increase their numbers in the face of institutional encouragements of various kinds] is, that the demand for a greater population is made without preparing the funds necessary to support it. Increase the demand for agricultural labour by promoting cultivation, and with it 24 There are instances of European populations increasing in greater proportion than food supplies, but these, too, are special cases. Prussia, Lithuania, Pomerania, Brandenburgh, and Magdeburgh illustrated the 'periodical though irregular returns of sickly seasons' (45), characterized by high death rates and low birth rates, unrelated to the question of land scarcity: 'Is it not probable, that in this case, the number of inhabitants had increased faster than the food and the accommodation necessary to preserve them in health? ... These causes may produce such an effect, though the country, absolutely considered, may not be extremely crowded and populous' (44). Yet Malthus also observed of Brandenburgh and Magdeburgh, notwithstanding their occasional sickly seasons, that they are 'increasing rather fast for old states' and takes this fact as proof that 'cultivation must have been improving, and marriages, consequently encouraged.'

34 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

consequently increase the produce of the country, and ameliorate the condition of the labourers, and no apprehensions whatever need be entertained of the proportional increase of population' (50) ,25 What now of the course of real wages in the normal course of secular development? Evidently they are at their lowest in the stationary state setting aside the possibility of 'forced' reductions - and by implication they must tend downwards over time. But we can be more explicit than that, for Malthus brings in the North American case - characterized by plentiful land resources - where 'the reward of labour is at present so liberal' (49), adding that 'it might be expected, that in the progress of the population of America, the labourers will in time be much less liberally rewarded.' (As we shall shortly see, Malthus later indicates that the decline was already under way.) No formal reason is given for the prospective decline, though it is evidently related to the increasing effect of land scarcity. Malthus merely asserts: 'The numbers will in this case permanently increase, without a proportional increase in the means of subsistence.' Here one must be cautious. Since excessive population growth had been represented as a special case relating to 'forced' expansion of population, as in China, or to miscalculation, as in Germany, the population pressure expected in the American case must be of an equilibrating nature; for example, should the decline in the food growth rate cease, there will be a lag during which the wage falls, bringing population growth into line but no further secular pressure exerted by gL > gF. And, because as gF falls, gL comes into line, the 'permanent increase' in numbers 'without a proportional increase in the means of subsistence' must refer to the falling average product rather than differential growth rates. Caution is in order also regarding a related passage in the same chapter: 'The happiness of a country ... [depends] upon the rapidity with which it is increasing, upon the degree in which the yearly increase in food approaches to the yearly increase of an unrestricted population' (51). This should not be read to imply that population growth is in fact usually 'unrestricted' - we know that there are scarcely any such cases. Rather, the higher the real wage, the higher will be gL (up to some maximum, the 'unrestricted' rate); and the wage will rise as gF rises towards the level of an unrestricted population growth. Should gF be lower - and we know Malthus believed it almost invariably will be - then the real wage will be lower; but in either case actual gL will (presumably after a lag) accommodate itself to gF.

25 Read literally, the notion of a 'proportional' increase of population suggests a horizontal secular population-growth-rate curve, at least till the maximum doubling in twentyfive years. But, as we shall see in what follows, the texts in the main imply an upwardsloping curve.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 35

Our interpretation is confirmed by a subsequent critique of Richard Price regarding stages of civilization as they affect population growth. Malthus there makes a further explicit statement regarding the downward course of real wages, its ultimate 'cause' and its impact on population growth, with special reference to the North American case: ' [Price] does not seem to be aware, that the happiness of the Americans, depended much less upon their peculiar degree of civilization, than upon the peculiarity of their situation, as new colonies, upon their having a great plenty of fertile uncultivated land ... The superior degree of civil liberty which prevailed in America, contributed, without doubt, its share to promote the industry, happiness, and population of these states: but even civil liberty, all powerful as it is, will not create land. The Americans may be said, perhaps, to enjoy a greater degree of civil liberty, now they are an independent people, than while they were in subjection to England; but we may be perfectly sure, that population will not long continue to increase with the same rapidity as it did then. A person who contemplated the happy state of the lower classes of people in America twenty years ago, would naturally wish to retain them forever in that state. [But] ... the situation of new colonies, well governed, is a bloom of youth that no efforts can arrest ... the best directed exertions, though they may alleviate, can never remove the pressure of want' (120-1). Here then, once again, is the 'prediction' of a continuation of the declining American real wage already under way for some two decades. Also clearly expressed is die negative effect - the equilibrating effect - of the declining real wage on population growth. The emphasis is upon the abatement of population growth in consequence of the falling wage. This wage decline is evidently attributed to a deceleration in labour demand, which in turn reflects that in food production. The increasing impact of land scarcity is conspicuous and apparently mediated via the labour market. The diminishing-returns model used to interpret the American case is subject to limitations. First, almost nothing is said of the profit rate; in particular, the downward trend in the profit rate characteristic of later versions of the Essay (and even to be found in the Wealth of Nations) plays no part.26 Second, the emphasis is on the average rather than the marginal product. VII

THE ENGLISH CASE

We turn now to 'the principal states of modern Europe.' These were

26 The closest one comes to a discussion of the implications of wage movements for the profit rate is on page 16, where 'farmers and capitalists' are described as 'growing rich from the real cheapness of labour' (cited below, p. 44). But the context relates to oscillatory movements, not the secular trend.

36 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

characterized by slow population growth: 'In examining the principal states of modern Europe, we shall find, that though they have increased very considerably in population since they were nations of shepherds, yet that, at present, their progress is but slow; and instead of doubling their numbers every twenty-five years, they require three or four hundred years, or more, for that purpose. Some, indeed, may be absolutely stationary, and others even retrograde. The cause of this slow progress in population cannot be traced to a decay of the passion between the sexes. We have sufficient reason to think that this natural propensity exists still in undiminished vigour. Why then do not its effects appear in a rapid increase of the human species?' (1798/1986, /, 26) ,27 The answer - England is taken as representative - turns on the operations of the 'preventive' and 'positive' checks: 'A foresight of the difficulties attending the rearing of a family, acts as a preventive check; and the actual distress of some of the lower classes, by which they are disabled from giving the proper food and attention to their children, acts as a positive check to the natural increase of population.' The preventive check, is thus defined in terms of 'prudential' population control; and this, as we show later, in chapter 18: IV, V, entails 'vice.' (A formal allowance for 'moral restraint' is introduced in 1803.) The positive check, entails 'misery.' As for the contemporary operation of the positive check, Malthus concedes that it is 'not so obvious to common view' as the preventive check (29), and he relies on impressionistic evidence to indicate its prevalence, which is said to be less in the country than in the towns. Even the Poor Laws are said, despite all the previous warnings, to have had a relatively small impact on population growth because of the precise manner of their administration: 'Notwithstanding then, the institution of the poor-laws in England, I think it will be allowed, that considering the state of the lower classes altogether, both in the towns and in the country, the distresses which they suffer from the want of proper and sufficient food, from hard labour and unwholesome habitations, must operate as a constant check to incipient population' (38). Evidently the contemporary low standards are not accounted for by 'excessive' population growth - as mentioned, even the Poor Laws had not much speeded up population growth; Malthus's intention was not (as Schumpeter presumed it to be) to convey the message that 'population was actually and inevitably increasing faster than subsistence and that this was the reason for the misery observed' (above, p. 13). Rather, such an out-

27 Malthus refers to the Price-Hewlett debate regarding population (110-11). Price believed population had actually fallen and, while Malthus disagreed, he saw Price as closer to the truth in that population growth was 'very slow.' He then refers to population growth as 'very slow, in comparison with the increase of wealth,' which is not quite the same thing.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 37

come would result from the extension of the Poor Laws or the adoption of communistic-type proposals such as Condorcet's or Godwin's, particularly considering the absence of a positive private cost of maintaining a family. As for actual British and European conditions, it is precisely very slow population growth for which he was attempting to account. Malthus's position reflects his generalization that the course of population can be deduced from that of food production: 'If the effectual funds for the maintenance of labour are increasing, that is, if the territory can maintain, as well as the stock employ, a greater number of labourers, this additional number will quickly spring up' (no). Correspondingly, population growth would be slow should the expansion of cereal production be slow, activating the various checks — 'positive' and 'preventive,' the former deriving from actual low living standards, that is, entailing 'misery,' and the latter from the effort to avoid a deterioration, and entailing 'vice.'28 The 'proof that the slow rate of increase of population in contemporary Europe could be explained by the various checks enumerated is taken up in Chapter VI of the Essay (1798). The new colonies of North America (which enjoyed 'plenty of room and food') had experienced the comparatively rapid increase that had 'invariably taken place, wherever these causes had been in any considerable degree removed' (38); 'these facts seem to shew that population increases exactly in the proportion that the two great checks to it, misery and vice, are removed ...' (41). That an equal absolute population in Britain did not produce 'an equal increase [of population] in the same time' as in the United States was precisely because of 'the great and obvious cause, the want of room and food, or, in other words misery,' or a low per-capita income.29 In the context of a comparison with the United States, land scarcity is thus represented as the ultimate cause of low standards in the British case.

28 Malthus frequently extends his categories of 'vice' and 'misery' to include forces acting upon the birth and death rates independently of actual or prospective living conditions. For example: 'The unwholesomeness of towns, to which some persons are necessarily driven from the nature of their trades, must be considered as a species of misery; and even the slightest check to marriage from a prospect of the difficulty of maintaining a family, may be fairly classed under the same head' (41). The effect on marriage falls within the formal definition of the preventive check; but unwholesome towns (and, in other contexts, war) cannot be said technically to constitute one of the positive checks since they are unrelated to the wage level. 29 Malthus's extension of his constraints to include housing as well as food silently complicates the model. For an early allusion to poor accommodation in 1798, see note 24, above. Further references are made to overcrowding as well as malnutrition in discussions of the mortality rate in 1803 and thereafter: 'crowded houses and insufficient and unwholesome food' were 'the natural consequence of an increase of population faster than the accommodations of a country with respect to habitation and food will allow' (1986, 3, 308).

38 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

We recall also the application of reasoning derived from growth based on land scarcity to account for the supposedly higher British population growth rate circa 1600-50 compared with circa 1680-1750 (see above, p. 32). Yet, for all that, Malthus did not perceive Britain as densely populated; Britain in his day is expressly described as 'thinly inhabited,' or at least 'not extremely crowded and populous' (44). Presumably, then, the comparison with the United States must be understood in a relative sense.30 The rationale — the increasing-land-scarcity rationale - offered for declining per-capita income in the period ending in the mid-eighteenth as compared with the seventeenth century does, however, pose a problem. For it is not the only account given of British development. I refer to a striking declaration regarding the determinants of 'happiness' applied to England: 'The happiness of a country does not depend, absolutely, upon its poverty, or its riches, upon its youth, or its age, upon its being thinly, or fully inhabited, but upon the rapidity with which it is increasing, upon the degree in which the yearly increase of food approaches to the yearly increase of an unrestricted population.31 This approximation is always the nearest in new colonies, where the knowledge and industry of an old State, operate on the fertile unappropriated land of a new one. In odier cases, the youth or the age of a State is not in this respect of very great importance. It is probable, that the food of Great Britain is divided in as great plenty to the inhabitants, at the present period, as it was two thousand, three thousand, or four thousand years ago. And there is reason to believe that the poor and thinly inhabited tracts of the Scotch Highlands, are as much distressed by an overcharged population, as the rich and populous province of Flanders' (51). To say, as Malthus does here, that a country's population/land ratio is irrelevant to the pace of growth of food supplies and the magnitude of real wages implies that the actual and prospective American growth pattern constituted a unique case. As for Britain, living standards had remained at low and roughly constant levels for ages, with population increasing in response to expansions in food supply, which, one is given to understand, reflect the 'natural progress of civilization' - the internal generation of novel technologies or higher motivation and the like.32 In the absence of

30 There is also the absence in the American case of institutions and policy hostile to agriculture. 31 In his unpublished pamphlet of 1796 (The Crisis), Malthus had taken issue with Paley (1785), specifically regarding the appropriate index of 'happiness'; see below, chapter 19: VI. 32 In the 1803 edition also Malthus spelled out that growth of the food supply had reflected 'gradual' improvement so that the corresponding growth rate of population w far below the maximum potential rate: 'This increase [of population] ... will merely follow the slow augmentation of produce from the gradual improvement of agriculture; and population will still be checked by the difficulty of procuring subsistence' (1986,3,448).

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 39

such forms of progress, there would be, apparently, no scope for growth at all. A stationary state is possible even where population is 'thin.'33 The analysis of British historical demography in terms of a downward trend in population growth owing to increasing land scarcity does not conform with the alternative just given. But the fact is that Malthus had proposed the analysis based on land scarcity circumspectly and with reservation (above, note 23). This treatment of the demographic data, important though it is from a theoretical perspective, should not therefore be weighed too heavily in attempting to isolate Mai thus's considered vision of English development. Our conclusion is confirmed by examination of Malthus's fuller analysis, from which it emerges that an agricultural-growth model tracing the implications of increasing land scarcity under pressure of rising population would be too simple for the more complex English case. In the English case net capital accumulation in the manufacturing sector, and therefore manufacturing output, had proceeded apace, with little positive effect upon the wages fund and labour demand. To this complexity we turn next. VIII

THE DISTRIBUTION OF ACTIVITY BETWEEN AGRICULTURE AND MANUFACTURING

Our concern here is with the implications of the distribution of activity between agriculture and manufacturing for population growth. The key issues are found in 1798 in the course of a criticism of Adam Smith's analysis of labour demand. Malthus warned against hoarding as a threat to output and employment (1798/1986, /, 104-5) - the context is a reaction to Godwin - adopting Smith's position that a country 'grows rich by parsimony,' since the savings process involves a transfer of revenue 'from the maintenance of labour that is generally unproductive ... [to] the maintenance of what realizes itself in valuable commodities' (100). But Smith had erred by identifying 'every increase of the revenue or stock of a society with an increase of these [real-wage] funds' (108). That identification was valid only from the perspective of the individual employer, whose (real) demand for labour indeed turned on his surplus stock or revenue. It was invalid from the perspective of society: 'It will not be a real and effectual demand for the maintenance of an additional number of labourers, unless the whole, or at least a great part of this increase of the stock or revenue of the society, be convertible into a proportional quantity of provisions; and it will not be so convertible, where the increase has arisen merely from the produce of labour, and not from the produce of

33 See also note 18, above. Rashid has criticized Malthus on the empirical grounds that in Ireland 'the prime Malthusian variable, the land-labor ratio, has little relation with poverty' (1981, 66). He has failed to see that this perspective is Malthus's own.

40 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

land. A distinction will in this case occur, between the number of hands which the stock of society could employ, and the number which its territory can maintain.' It followed that net capital accumulation in the manufacturing sector, and therefore manufacturing output, might proceed apace with no positive effect upon the wages fund and labour demand: 'Dr. Adam Smith defines the wealth of a nation to consist in the annual produce of its land and labour. This definition includes manufactured produce, as well as the produce of the land. Now supposing a nation, for a course of years, was to add what it saved from its yearly revenue, to its manufacturing capital solely, and not to its capital employed upon the land, it is evident, that it might grow richer according to the above definition, without a power of supporting a greater number of labourers, and therefore, without an increase in the real funds for the maintenance of labour.' The effect of capital accumulation would be on money wages and food prices, not on real wages: There would, notwithstanding, be a demand for labour, from the power which each manufacturer would possess, or at least think he possessed, of extending his old stock in trade, or of setting up new works. This demand would of course raise the price of labour; but if the yearly stock of provisions in the country was not increasing, this rise would soon turn out to be merely nominal, as the price of provisions must necessarily rise with it.' Similarly: 'A great accession of work from manufactures, though it may raise the price of labour even more than an increasing demand for agricultural labour; yet, as in this case, the quantity of food in the country may not be proportionably increasing, the advantage to the poor will be but temporary, as the price of provisions must necessarily rise in proportion to the price of labour' (106).34 Food supplies might actually/a//as the increasing demand for manufacturing labour attracts workers from the farms, although this outcome is set aside by the supposition that such a transfer would be 'compensated by improvements in the instruments of agriculture' (108). This allowance for new technology is not made merely to simplify the argument; technical change is represented as part and parcel of the 'normal' growth patterns. This view emerges immediately in a reference to manufactures: 'Improvement in manufacturing machinery would of course take place,' contributing (together with the higher manufacturing workforce drawn from agriculture) to an expansion of manufacturing output. And this without 'giving the labouring poor a greater command over the necessaries and conveniences of life' - indeed, even causing a net deterioration in well-being because of unhealthy conditions in the manufacturing centres and 'the greater uncertainty of manufacturing labour' (109). 34 To some extent the expansion of manufacturing reflected mercantilist interferences which attracted 'the very best land,' even 'land that would bear good crops of corn.' But pressure of demand for meat is also said to be 'a natural and inevitable consequence of the general progress of civilization' (112), a Smithian perspective.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 41

The positive effect on food supplies of rising food prices is minimized, for transfers of capital into agriculture would occur but slowly, especially since the rise had been preceded by an increase in money wages, which acts as a depressant.35 Food imports are also played down, for 'very high' food prices would be required 'to make an [appreciable] importation and distribution answer in large countries.' All in all, the expectation is of unchanged (even reduced) food supplies in consequence of non-agricultural expansion. Various references in the Essay to contemporary English development make sense only when read with the foregoing in mind. Thus England is said to be 'one of the most flourishing states of Europe' and yet its population 'increases slowly' (26). Its 'flourishing' nature cannot consist in rapid increases in food supply, for then, on Malthus's own account, one would expect rapid population growth, which is not the case. This is further confirmed by an application to the consequences for labour of development since 1688. From the rapid expansion of domestic and foreign trade and of the value of national output, which reflected manufacturing progress, labourers had not benefited: 'though the wealth of the nation has been advancing with a quick pace, the effectual funds for the maintenance of labourers have been increasing very slowly ... The increasing wealth of the nation has had little or no tendency to better the condition of the labouring poor. They have not, I believe, a greater command of the necessaries and conveniences of life; and a much greater proportion of them, than at the period of the revolution, is employed in manufactures, and crowded together in close and unwholesome rooms' (no).36 There had, however, been some net expansion of food (cereal) supplies, and consequently some growth of population: That the produce of the land has been decreasing, or even that it has been absolutely stationary during the last century, few will be disposed to believe' (ill). But this very moderate expansion was the outcome of 'improved husbandry,' not a growing agricultural workforce, as we shall show later, in chapter 15: II. (Maithus actually asserts that the numbers in the agricultural workforce had fallen absolutely as a 35 Here an impact on the profit rate is implied. 36 This emerges, too, in a discussion of the preventive check as it applies to 'the sons of tradesmen and farmers' in England: 'These are exhorted not to marry, and generally find it necessary to pursue this advice, till they are settled in some business, or farm, that may enable them to support a family. These events may not, perhaps, occur till they are far advanced in life. The scarcity of farms is a very general complaint in England. And the competition in every kind of business is so great that it is not possible that all would be successful' (27). (The reference to a 'scarcity of farms' probably alludes, not to land scarcity as such in the technical sense, but to institutional impediments to land transfer. Contrast the American case, with its system of 'alienation and division of property,' absence of primogeniture, and illegality of land hoarding.) The passage confirms the notion of England as a 'flourishing' state - but it is flourishing with respect to capital accumulation generally, not in agriculture.

42 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

result of reorganization and labour-displacing technology.) The net population expansion must, therefore, have been employed almost wholly in manufactures. The small increase in wage goods, coupled with the instability of manufacturing (and also the immobility of labour owing to the Poor Law institution), suggested that living standards were no higher than a century before.37 IX

THE OSCILLATORY PROCESS

The precedence of food over population is a frequent theme of the first Essay. For example, 'the only true criterion of a real and permanent increase in the population, of any country, is the increase of the means of subsistence' - apart from special cases where population is 'forced' despite the absence of a prior increase of food (cited above, p. 33). It is suggested also by the generalization that 'population constantly bears a regular proportion to the food the earth is made to produce' (above, p. 28), or that 'a greater proportional yearly increase of produce will invariably be followed by a greater proportional increase of population' (above, p. 32); or that 'if the effectual funds for the maintenance of labour are increasing ... [the] additional number [of labourers] will quickly spring up' (above, p. 37).38 Notwithstanding these generalizations regarding the precedence of food supply over population expansion, Chapter II of the first Essay introduces an analysis - one that has recently attracted attention and various attempts at 'rational reconstruction' - in which the expansion of population and that of food supply occur in interlocked steps. This analysis makes no mention of the geometric and arithmetic growth rates of population and food, respectively. Nothing in fact is said regarding rates of growth; it is the process of absolute expansion that is at issue. It is here that we would expect to encounter a notion of diminishing returns, but it is absent. The 'population principle' in this context takes the form in 1798 — though not in later editions - of the simple assertion that 'in all societies, even those that are most vicious [see below, chapter 18: IV], the tendency to a virtuous attachment [to one woman] is so strong, that there is a constant effort towards an increase of population' (1798/1986, /, 14).39

37 For a discussion of Malthus on 'immiserizing growth,' see Gilbert, 1980. 38 As a further example: 'the increasing produce of a country, and the increasing demand for labour ... ameliorate the condition of the labourer, as greatly to encourage marriage' (45). On the other hand, a few sentences earlier it is from 'a prospect of increasing plenty in any country, [that] the weight that represses population is in some degree removed' (emphasis added), which is not quite the same as an actual increase of food. 39 In subsequent editions the generalization reads: 'There are few states in which there is

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 43

This increase occurs whenever food supplies have grown relative to population to ensure the 'easy support' of labour: We will suppose the means of subsistence in any country just equal to the easy support of its inhabitants. The constant effort towards population, which is found to act even in the most vicious societies, increases the number of people before the means of subsistence are increased. The food therefore which before supported seven [1803: eleven] millions must now be divided among seven millions and a half or eight millions [1803: eleven millions and a half]. The poor consequently must live much worse, and many of them be reduced to severe distress. The number of labourers also being above the proportion of the work in the market, the price of labour must tend toward a decrease [1803: tend to fall]; while the price of provisions would at the same time tend to rise. The labourer therefore must work harder [1803: do more work] to earn the same as he did before. During this season of distress, the discouragements to marriage, and the difficulty of rearing a family are so great that the population is at a stand [1803: that population is nearly at a stand; 1817: the progress of population is retarded]. In the meantime, the cheapness of labour, the plenty of labourers, and the necessity of an increased industry amongst them, encourage cultivators to employ more labourers upon their land; to turn up fresh soil, and to manure and improve more completely what is already in tillage; till ultimately the means of subsistence become [1803: may become] in the same proportion to the population as at the period from which we set out. The situation of the labourer being then again tolerably comfortable, the restraints to population are in some degree loosened; and [1803: and after a short period] the same retrograde and progressive movements with respect to happiness are repeated. (14-15)4° In this account, agricultural expansion is as much dependent upon the prior expansion of population as population growth is upon the prior expansion of agriculture; more intensive and extensive cultivation is undertaken only in response to reduced corn wages. But the striking feature of the account is the secular constancy of product per capita: 'The means of subsistence become in the same proportion to the population as at the period from which we set out.' The stimulus to expansion generated by falling corn wages apparently peters out as the downward movement slackens and is then reversed, but the end result is a larger aggregate food supply proportionate to the initially increased population.

not a constant effort in the population to increase beyond the means of subsistence.' In all editions Malthus continued: This constant effort as constantly tends to subject the lower classes of society to distress, and to prevent any permanent amelioration of their condition' (see 1986, 2, 17). 40 The variations between editions are taken up below, in section XII.

44 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

The oscillatory pattern, Malthus admitted, was not easy to discern statistically: 'This sort of oscillation will not be remarked by superficial observers; and it may be difficult even for the most penetrating mind to calculate its periods. Yet that in all old states some such vibration does exist; though from various transverse causes, in a much less marked, and in a much more irregular measure than I have described it, no reflecting man who considers the subject deeply can well doubt. Many reasons occur why this oscillation has been less obvious, and less decidedly confirmed by experience, than might naturally be expected' (i5).41 Concealing the oscillatory pattern is 'the difference between the nominal and real price of labour' (16). For the money wage is pretty constant. Still the real wage falls as the price of corn rises under pressure of (temporary) scarcity; the correction, which involves expansion of food supplies, is ultimately achieved, capitalist farmers being enriched 'from the real cheapness of labour' and reacting by expanding capital (food output) and the demand for labour: 'It very rarely happens that the nominal price of labour universally falls; but we well know that it frequently remains the same, while the nominal price of provisions has been gradually increasing. This is, in effect, a real fall in the price of labour; and during this period, the condition of the lower orders of the community must be growing worse and worse. But the farmers and capitalists are growing rich from the real cheapness of labour. Their increased capitals enable them to employ a greater number of men. Work therefore may be plentiful; and the price of labour would consequently rise.' Ultimately, the money wage rises under pressure of increasing labour demand, though this, too, is impeded somewhat by employer combinations and parish laws.42 The oscillatory process was not apparently intended to cancel the precedence accorded food over population. Rather, the purpose of the exercise was to bring out 'the manner in which the constant check upon population acts.' Some formulations are worthy of James Mill: 'That population cannot increase without the means of subsistence, is a proposition so evident that it needs no illustration' (17). In brief, the sort of population growth which, by depressing the corn wage, stimulates agricultural expansion in the oscillatory process, must be contrasted with the 'forcing' of population described in the account of China, where 'population increased permanently, without an increase in the means of subsistence' (49) ,43 There remains the relevance of oscillations for the British case. While 41 For later modifications to this passage, see below, p. 63. 42 Complicating features include the systems of money-wage supplements. As the account of Chapter V has it: 'The food of a country that has been long occupied, if it be increasing, increases slowly and regularly, and cannot be made to answer any sudden demands; but variations in the distribution of the money of a society are not infrequently occurring, and are undoubtedly among the causes that occasion the continual variations which we observe in the price of provisions' (32-3) • 43 The oscillations also must be contrasted with the special cases of excessive population growth characterizing various German states (above, note 24).

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 45

FIGURE 1.1 The equilibrium wage and the equilibrium growth rate of 'the real funds for the maintenance of labour' (corn) are determined by the intersection of gL - the relation between the corn wage and population growth - and gK, the capital (food) growth rate.

Malthus stressed the actuality of the phenomenon, his account of British development does not in fact seem to accord with the oscillatory pattern. What small expansion of domestic food supplies (corn) occurred is said to have been achieved despite a declining agricultural workforce by means of new technology, rather than under pressure of (temporarily) falling real wages (sections VII and VIII, above).44

Various interpretations have been offered for the wage oscillations. Eltis (1984, 117) reads Malthus as describing fluctuations of the corn wage about an equilibrium wage, and corresponding fluctuations of the growth rate of food about an equilibrium rate - a stable cobweb solution - as in figure 1.1. This interpretation turns on differential growth rates of food and population, whereas the passage itself refers to absolute population expansion before food is provided followed by absolute food expansion with population temporarily constant. This may not be too problematic if we understand the passage as stating a matter of general principle that might be extended.45 More serious is the fact that the oscillations - and their corn-wage counterparts - do not, according to the text, peter out at some 'equilibrium' rate. Eltis has, I believe, read too much into the passage. That the corn wage is represented as fluctuating about a constant level in the course of population growth should be kept in mind in evaluating 44 It may be pertinent that, in the 1803 edition, the applicability of the oscillatory process to 'all old states' is altered to 'the generality of old states' (see below, p. 63). 45 In 1817 Malthus himself refers to the passage in terms of population 'increasing at certain periods faster than food' (see below, chapter 5: VIII). This contrast helps evaluate the respective positions adopted by Waterman (1987) and Dooley (1988) in their debate as to whether Malthus intended a 'zigzag' path (Waterman) or continuous capital accumulation and population growth, each variable subject to a lagged reaction to change in its respective return (Dooley).

46 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

FIGURE 1.2 WE represents a subsistence-wage path such that population growth would cease at that wage. HE represents the maximum corn wage compatible with the mininum profit rate, or that profit rate at which net accumulation is zero. The wage oscillates on the path to final equilibrium at E (Waterman, 1987, 258, 264, 266). If some growth of capital occurs before population growth ceases, points such as B, D would lie on a curve above WE (but approaching E).

a representation of the Malthusian oscillatory perspective by Waterman (1987; 1991, 52); Waterman rejects the 'dynamic cobweb' about a steadystate equilibrium attributed to Malthus.46 There is rather a gravitation of the corn wage towards the stationary state that occurs by way of fluctuations, entailing 'a concertina-like edging towards stationary equilibrium. First population grows, forcing wages down and raising the rate of profit. Then population stops and capital grows, raising wages and forcing down the rate of profit. And so on' (1987, 259, 269; also 1991, 52; see figure 1.2). On Waterman's account, population growth occurs only when wages are at their maximum (on HE) - this is his reading of the initial supposition that 'the means of subsistence [are] just equal to the easy support of its inhabitants ...' (1987, 264); and capital (food supply) growth occurs only when wages are at their minimum (WE), or the profit rate at its maximum. On an average, both the corn wage and the profit rate decline to their respective permanent minima in the stationary state. This seems an extreme reading. The main problem is the fact that the oscillatory account makes no mention of increasing land scarcity. There does exist in the first Essay a land scarcity-based model which is applied to the American case (above, section VI). But this entails a declining secular corn wage, whereas the oscillatory process is conspicuous for constancy (on an average) of the corn wage. This land scarcity-based model, one might add, makes no mention of the trend path of the profit rate (it is a partial formulation only) in contrast to the oscillatory model, where fluctuations in the profit rate do make an appearance. 46 He objects to Eltis's view on the grounds that the gK or capital-growth curve (identifiable with wage goods and constituting labour demand) shifts inwards under pressure of increasingly scarce land, generating a decline of the 'maximum wage' towards the subsistence level (1987, 267).

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 47

Waterman in effect is proposing that we superimpose Malthus's oscillations onto a full-fledged land-based growth model, though such a model does not yet exist in the first Essay, and though the average path of corn wages, in any event, differs between the two accounts. There is, in fact, some evidence that Malthus did not intend such superposition, although one cannot be sure. For he limits the applicability of his oscillations: 'in all old states some such vibration does exist' (1798/1986, /, 15 cited above, p. 44; emphasis added), a constraint which might well reflect the fact that the increase of American food supplies and population were so continuously high as to render oscillations inconsequential.47 X

DIMINISHING RETURNS AND GROWTH,

1803

We consider now textual evidence of 1803 regarding land scarcity reflected in diminishing returns, as ultimate rationale for deceleration of food production, and consequently of population growth. Although our concern here is not primarily with the empirical dimension, we shall find that it inevitably intrudes. We have, in 1803, the same perspective as in 1798 regarding the American case involving the dual linkages: (1) of per-capita output to population density, and (2) of population growth to per-capita output, the latter mediated via the labour market and turning on capital accumulation in agriculture or the growth rate of food supplies (1798/1986, /, 39f.; 1803/1986, 2, 3O4f.). There is little doubt that the notion of diminishing returns - in the guise of a decline in per-capita output with increases in the population/land ratio - was central to the analysis. There is also in both editions reference to the 'expectation' (indeed, a trend actually under way) that 'in the progress of the population of America, the labourers will in time be much less liberally rewarded,' that is, a falling real-wage path (/, 49; 2, 313). And in both, there is lacking any formal discussion of the profit rate and its trend. We call attention now to a reformulation in 1803 of the criticism of David Hume's position that absolute population size had declined over the ages.48 (For the original account in 1798, see above, pp. 28-9.) The prevalence of 'checks' to marriage could not be taken as a priori evidence of a low population; rather, the contrary: no cause, physical or moral, unless it operate in an excessive and unusual manner, will have any considerable and permanent effect on the population, except in as far as it influences the production and distribution of the means of subsistence.

47 On this see also Dooley, 1988. 48 Malthus also had in mind Wallace, 1753, 80.

48 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY In the controversy concerning the populousness of ancient and modern nations this point has not been sufficiently attended to; and physical and moral causes have been brought forward on both sides, from which no just inference in favour of either party could be drawn. It seems to have escaped the attention of both writers, that the more productive and populous a country is in its actual state, the less probably will be its power of obtaining a further increase of produce; and consequently the more checks must necessarily be called into action, to keep the population down to the level of this stationary or slowly increasing produce. From finding such checks, therefore, in ancient or modern nations, no inference can be drawn against the absolute populousness of either ... When the difficulties attending the rearing a family are very great, and consequently many persons of both sexes remain single, we may naturally enough infer that population is stationary, but by no means that it is not absolutely great; because the difficulty of rearing a family may arise from the very circumstance of a great absolute population, and the consequent fullness of all the channels to a livelihood; though the same difficulty may undoubtedly exist in a thinly peopled country, which is yet stationary in its population. (2, 151-2; emphasis added)

The notion of reduced per-capita output, and accordingly of population growth at higher absolute population size (with allusion to the limiting stationary state), is formulated already in 1798, and indeed directed against Hume, who had pointed to strong encouragement of marriage and procreation as a sign of high absolute population, and to the converse in the case where checks are strong. The reformulation of 1803 adds precision by its reference to the declining 'power of obtaining a further increase of produce' at higher absolute population and aggregate food output, for this seems to entail diminishing returns — indeed, diminishing marginal returns. This is an open possibility, but we must also allow that the reference may be to a declining growth rate of produce with absolute increase in population density. Yet even in the latter case, the last section of our extract does bring out clearly enough the notion of reduced per-capita income at high population/land ratios.49 While this particular formulation adds precision to the discussion of 1798, the case is reversed in another context. In the first Essay there is found a brief statement of the land scarcity-based growth model, including deceleration of food production owing to diminishing returns at the extensive margin accompanied by (or rather 'followed by') a corresponding decline of population growth (above, p. 32). This formulation is absent in 1803 (cf. /, 47; 2, 248). The context suggests why. The issue in 1798 is the accuracy of the village and market-town 'registers,' particularly the accuracy of the registers for the earlier period, which indicated a higher excess of

49 But it also qualifies that notion by allowing for cases where per-capita income is low despite low population density. On this qualification, see below, pp. 54-5.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 49

births over deaths than subsequently. Richard Price (17Q2)50 had questioned the early data, but Malthus argued tentatively in their favour and provided a possible rationale - namely, the encouragement given population growth by relatively good land resources, and, by implication, the deceleration of population growth with increasing land scarcity manifested in diminishing returns at the extensive margin. Now, by 1803, Malthus was newly aware of the fact of accelerating population growth, attributing it to 'the more rapid progress of commerce and agriculture' (2, 238).51 He came to question the accuracy of the registers (his main concern in 1803 is actually to compare the early and later years of the eighteenth-century), so that the theoretical rationale originally offered in support of a decelerating growth rate was no longer relevant. That fact does not, however, necessarily touch on the validity of the model itself. The 1817 version, we shall find (chapter 5: III), explains with admirable clarity that the deceleration of population growth imposed by land scarcity and exercised by declining corn wages might be avoided by working-class constraints on procreation. This alternative is to be found already in the 1803 essay, though less formally expressed, in a reference to the hope that labour should acquire 'the habit of proportioning the supplies of labour to a stationary or even decreasing demand, without an increase of misery and mortality' (3, 567).

There is, we conclude, clear recognition in 1798 and 1803 of the notion of falling average product with rising population density, with a maximum to population size when the wage is reduced to subsistence, an outcome, it is intimated in 1803, that might be avoided by deliberate population constraint. We consider next further textual evidence often alluded to in the secondary literature. One conspicuous passage involves the 'reservoir' analogy of 1798, originally introduced to refute the notion that, in the American case, food supplies must have been growing at a geometric rate since they keep pace with population growth ( I , 4in; above, p. 31). (Actually, the refutation was merely nominal; Malthus had effectively conceded that food does grow geometrically as long as a 'reservoir' of untapped land is available.) In the second edition, the 'reservoir' analogy is absent, and with it is abandoned even the formal attempt to show that subsistence never increases at a geometric rate (cf. Cannan, 1917, ill). But Malthus retains the notion of 'the yearly increase of food' as a diminishing stream,

50 Malthus used the fifth (1792) edition of Price's Reversionary Payments; see James, in Malthus, 1803/1989, II, 325. 51 See, for an elaboration, chapter 16, below, on the 'population problem.'

50 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

assuming in effect the reservoir of 'fertile land' to be emptied. The last three sentences in the following passage are exactly as in the 1798 edition, though now given a conspicuous place in the first chapter: 'It may safely be pronounced, therefore, 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. Of this, however, we may be perfectly certain, that the ratio of their increase must be totally of a different nature from the ratio of the increase of population. A thousand millions are just as easily doubled every twenty five years by the power of population as a thousand. But the food to support the increase from the greater number will by no means be obtained with the same facility. Man is necessarily confined in room. When acre has been added to acre till all the fertile land is occupied, the yearly increase of food must depend upon the amelioration of the land already in possession. This is a stream, 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 vigour; and the increase of one period would furnish the power of a greater increase the next, and this without any limit' (2, 10—11). This famous passage refers explicidy to alternative annual rates of increase. It asserts that the maximum growth rate of food declines with increasing paucity of agricultural resources,52 whereas maximum potential population growth remains constant. But it does not necessarily imply diminishing returns in the sense of falling average (let alone marginal) product at higher population/land ratios; for conceivably a reduction in the time period over which given absolute increases in food are attempted, that is, a reduction of the food growth rate below its maximum, would avoid falling per-capita output. This latter possibility is precluded if we read the passage in the light of the texts discussed above that do involve falling productivity with increased population density. Whether we are justified in so doing is an open question. It remains true (as in the 1798 case) that the polemical object of the essay would in any event be assured in terms of the more general argument entailing a constraint on population growth despite constant average product. In the elaboration that follows, Malthus refers to the length of time required to 'improve the minds' and 'direct the industry' of various races as an indication of the constraints on the global growth rate of food supplies. He takes Europe (especially Britain) as the best case for his illustration of the theme: Europe is by no means so fully peopled as it might be. In Europe there is the fairest chance that human industry may receive its best direction. The science of 52 This possibly reflects nothing more than the arithmetic ratio, which of course entails a falling percentage annual increase.

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 51

agriculture has been much studied in England and Scotland; and there is still a great portion of uncultivated land in these countries. Let us consider at what rate the produce of this island might be supposed to increase under circumstances the most favourable to improvement. If it be allowed that by the best possible policy, and great encouragements to agriculture, the average produce of the island could be doubled in the first twenty five years, it will be allowing, probably, a greater increase than could with reason be expected. In the next twenty years, it is impossible to suppose that the produce could be quadrupled. It would be contrary to all our knowledge of the properties of land. The improvement of the barren parts would be a work of time and labours and it must be evident to those who have the slightest acquaintance with agricultural subjects, that in proportion as cultivation extended, the additions that could yearly be made to the former average produce must be gradually and regularly diminishing. That we may be the better able to compare the increase of population and food, let us make a supposition, which, without pretending to accuracy, is clearly more favourable to the power of production in the earth, than any experience we have had of its qualities will warrant. Let us suppose that the yearly additions which might be made to the former average produce, instead of decreasing, which they certainly would do, were to remain the same; and that the produce of this island might be increased every twenty five years, by a quantity equal to what it at present produces: the most enthusiastic speculator cannot suppose a greater increase than this. In a few centuries it would make every acre of land in the island like a garden. (2, 11-12) When compared with the equivalent passage of 1798 (cf. /, 11-12; cited above, p. 19), we find here: (i) added confirmation (the first paragraph) that 'a great portion of uncultivated land' and high technology characterized the British economy; (2) added reference to the 'time and labours' required by 'improvement of the barren parts';53 and (3) an insertion regarding the 'gradually and regularly' diminishing yearly additions 'to the former average produce.' Again, too much should not be made of this latter modification as a new allusion to the law of diminishing returns. In the first place, the text simply reiterates what had appeared already in 1798 (see above, section III): 'a person who is acquainted with the nature of the soil in this country, and who reflects on the fertility of the lands already in cultivation, and the

53 In the 1806 appendix, Malthus introduced an analogy with the preparation of a farm by proper management before added stock could be effectively supported; similarly, without appropriate preparation of the land, an expansion of population would generate unacceptably low standards, but, with it, the same expansion might be accommodated under more favourable conditions (1806, II, 508-9, 517-18). See also Malthus i824b/ig86, 4, 180-1, 195.

52 GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT THEORY

barrenness of those that are not cultivated, will be very much disposed to doubt, whether the whole average produce could possibly be doubled in twenty five years from the present period ... Difficult, however, as it might be, to double the average produce of the island in twenty five years, let us suppose it effected ... During the next period of doubling [of population], where will the food be found to satisfy the importunate demands of the increasing numbers. Where is the fresh land to turn up? Where is the dressing necessary to improve that which is already in cultivation? There is no person with the smallest knowledge of land, but would say, that it is impossible that the average produce of the country could be increased during the second twenty five years by a quantity equal to what it at present yields' (/, 68-9; for the identical 1803 statement see 3, 333-4). To assert in 1803 that 'the additions that could yearly be made to the former average produce must be gradually and regularly diminishing' is only to make explicit what is already very clear in 1798. But, as is true of the 1798 statement, the notion of diminishing yearly additions to the former average produce is not necessarily identifiable with 'diminishing returns.'54 Cannan, who was critical of the idea that the Essay turns on diminishing returns, conceded (1917, 115) that there is in 1803 a 'rudimentary' allowance for the true law in the rejection of Anderson's proposition (in Malthus's paraphrase) 'that every increase of population tends to increase relative plenty and vice versa: 'But when an accidental depopulation takes place in a country which was before populous and industrious, and in the habit of exporting corn, if the remaining inhabitants be left at liberty to exert, and do exert, their industry in the same direction as before, it is a strange idea to entertain, that they would then be unable to supply themselves with corn in the same plenty; particularly as the diminished numbers would of course cultivate principally the more fertile parts of their territory, and not be obliged, as in their more populous state, to apply to ungrateful soils ... [If] absolute populousness were necessary to relative plenty, as some agriculturalists have supposed, it would be impossible for new colonies to increase with the same rapidity as old states' (1803/1986, 3, 452).55 Cannan, with this passage in mind, warned readers not to exaggerate the implications of a 'casual' and 'subsidiary' use of one of the principal

54 In both editions we also have the rhetorical question regarding a doubling at fifteen years - Where is 'the labour needed to double the produce in so short a time'? (1986, i> 75! 3> 339) — implying the possibility of a doubled produce with doubled population, assuming a longer period. For the same motion in the third edition, see 1806, II, 120. 55 Jacob Hollander argued — as do others more recently — that, whereas in 1798 there is 'no explicit statement of a law of diminishing returns,' Malthus in 1803 responded to James Anderson's allusions to increasing returns by inserting a long note in reply and intimating in the text 'a law of diminishing returns in unmistakable terms' (1903, 4-5).

THE ESSAY ON POPULATION 53

ideas on which the law of diminishing returns is based. The main population principle, he believed, still turned, as in 1798, on the geometric and arithmetic ratios. Now it is certainly the case that the primary concern of the passage is the growth rate of food relative to that of population, rather than produce per capita, as such. This is suggested by the reference to new colonies at the close of the passage, and more clearly by a footnote attached thereto which alludes to Anderson's position in the Calm Investigation (1801) and adds: '[Anderson] concludes his proofs by observing that, if the facts which he had thus brought forward and connected do not serve to remove the fears of those, who doubt the possibility of this country producing abundance to sustain its increasing population (were it to augment in a ratio greatly more progressive than it has yet done) he should doubt whether they could be convinced of it, were one even to rise from the dead to tell them so ... I agree with Mr. Anderson however, entirely, respecting the importance of directing a greater part of the national industry to agriculture; but, from the circumstance of its being possible for a country with a certain direction of its industry always to export corn, although it may be very populous, he has been led into the strange error of supposing, that an agricultural economy could support an unchecked population' (emphasis added) .5 223). In 1826 there appeared William Jacob's Report on the Trade in Corn and on the Agriculture of the North of Europe (dated 21 February 1826, delivered to the Commons, 2O April 1826, House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, N.S., 15, 400-89), one theme of which was that British protection caused a contraction of European cultivation. This was attacked by agriculturalists as the opinion of a convert to liberalism designed to put at ease fears regarding a dependency on foreign sources of supply. There were intimations of this theme in a speech by W.Whitmore, 28 April 1825, 13, 252f. (See also Whitmore's speech of 18 April 1826 drawing on the still untabled report, 16, 3l8f.) 76 Malthus opens his note of 1826 by stating that the commonality of harvest fluctuation across Europe, which prevented the possibility of steady prices under free trade, was not 'a decisive reason against the abolition or alteration of the corn laws' (above, p. 851). Now Huskisson and the government had been induced by the evidence of common

AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION 859

although we also recall that the Ricardo scheme was expected at least to reduce the problem, and that might have carried some weight in the new balance. But if the problem of stability still remained a concern, it was one that was outweighed by the benefits of free trade. There can be little doubt about the destiny of that part of the original case for the Corn Laws turning on the need to counter 'mercantilist' regulations, including manufacturing protection (above, p. 840). In so far as the new governmental program included a reduction of industrial tariffs (above, note 72), this particular dimension would have been rendered increasingly obsolete. Even so, this consideration would not account for the transition in its entirety, since the full protectionist case related to the prevention of an otherwise 'natural' tendency towards a preponderance of manufacturing. An important dimension to Mai thus's positive response to the new government policy emerges in his 1824 Quarterly Review article on Ricardian economics. There he allowed that expansion of foreign markets for British manufactures had mitigated the worst effects of the postwar depression by drawing labour from the agricultural sector: 'In the period which has elapsed since the return of peace, the difficulty of finding employment, particularly on the land, has been too notorious to require proof; and if, owing to the extraordinary stimulus given to the population by the previous demand for it, it still continues to increase with rapidity, yet there is reason to think that the present demand would not nearly have kept pace with the rate of increase, and that great distress would have been the consequence, if the happy opening of new and large channels of foreign commerce, combined with the improved views of our government in commercial legislation, had not prepared the way for a renewed demand for labour' (1986, 7, 287). It is particularly relevant, considering the 1826 note, that the expansion of foreign markets is in part ascribed to the 'improved views of our government in commercial legislation.' The empirical significance of manufactures from the perspective of aggregate activity reinforces the case for free trade since expanded markets could

climatic conditions and seasonal correspondence positively to warn against protection and the resultant discouragement of secular agricultural expansion abroad, since sporadic inflows of corn during scarce years could not be relied upon (see Hilton, 1977, 110-17). Malthus had already in 1817 recognized the problem of periodic general European scarcity which might discourage foreign producers from shipping food to Britain, drawing on evidence before the 1814 Commons Committee on the Corn Laws (1817, II, 450-1). But in 1817 he had used these purported facts to make a case for a corn-export bounty to assure that home production would suffice for normal requirements so that the extraordinary requirements of poor seasons could be more easily met by imports, despite general scarcity. In the 1826 note, in sharp contrast, the very same facts are said not to justify protectionism - the conclusion reached by Huskisson, though without specifying Huskisson's grounds.

860 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

scarcely be relied upon with agriculture 'so marked an exception' to a general free-trade program. The protectionist case of 1815 had turned in part on the unrealistically large expansions of manufacturing required to absorb even the agricultural workers who were unemployed in 1815 (above, p. 831). By the mid-i820s, the manufacturing sector was proving itself adequate in that respect.77 Actually, even when making his case for agricultural protection in 1815 (above, p. 825) and in the 1817 essay (above, p. 836), Malthus had included the discouragement of manufactures among the costs of such a policy. This concern becomes decisive in 1824. There is a related matter - the classical proposition that the relatively high manufacturing (export) productivity of a particular trading nation allows and assures that nation a higher price level in international monetary equilibrium. This proposition would put paid to the original concern - that of 1803, 1806, and 1814 (it does not appear in 1817) - with the undermining of competitiveness in consequence of a higher price level generated by a disparate expansion of manufactures. The causal sequence is reversed; general prices are high because of high export efficiency. We have encountered Mai thus's subscription to that position in our account of international monetary economics (chapter 14: VI); it appears, we there found, in a note added in 1826 to the very chapter 'Restrictions upon Importation' which has preoccupied us (1986, 5, 43on).78 The question arises whether the newly emphasized danger to aggregate activity arising from impediments to manufacturing exports reflected only the circumstances of the early i820s,79 Malthus still maintaining that balanced growth was essential to reduce the force of increased competition of capital characterizing an industrial economy since export sales of home manufactures could not ultimately be relied upon (above, pp. 836f.). The

77 This sort of consideration might also have undermined the concern in 1815 with price deflation - and its implications for the debt burden - in consequence of free agricultural trade (above, p. 826). 78 The doctrine will also be found in an addition to the second edition of the Principles (1836, 104-5) - it is only hinted at in 1820 (compare 1820, 198, and 1836, 189; see Pullen, II, 182); in evidence of 1824 before the Select Committee on Artisans and Machinery (House of Commons, Parliamentary Papers, V, 600); in the review of Tooke's High and Low Prices (18233/1986, 7, 153); and in the letter to Chalmers of 6 March 1832 (see below, p. 861). 79 Malthus describes the Ricardo free-trade scheme as the 'best suited to our present situation.' This might allude specifically to circumstances with an eye on manufacturing expansion, implying that the free-trade proposal was designed to deal with an immediate employment problem. But the description might equally refer to more permanent considerations, as the note taken as a whole and other considerations discussed below suggest. There was some evidence already in 1823 °f 'tne passing away of agricultural distress' (Smart, 1910-17, II, 134).

AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION 861

1824 formulation rejecting intervention suggests strongly abandonment of that concern (above, p. 849).

Let us now recall the original protectionist position in Grounds of an Opinion (1815), and its affirmation that, pound for pound, the loss of agricultural capital and output is more damaging than a similar loss in other sectors from the perspective of both consumption power and tax revenue (above, p. 833). The emphasis in 1824 on expenditure derived from export sales and the rejection of pro-agricultural intervention implies the abandonment of the case for unproductive consumption by landlords. In this regard, the Malthus-Chalmers correspondence is highly revealing. For in the same letter to Chalmers of 6 March 1832 in which he wrote of his support for Corn Law repeal (above, p. 854), Malthus also defended industrial exports as essential to national wealth and power (alluding in part to the advantages of a high level of money rents and prices), and questioned the quantitative significance of aggregate demand exerted by the 'dependents upon the landlords' compared with that exerted by capitalists and traders: 'Have you not pushed too far the doctrine of the non-importance of foreign commerce? In the 29th section of your synoptical view you allow that the superior influence of Great Britain over other nations in distant parts is due to her exports.80 Without these therefore she would be less powerful, and I should certainly add less wealthy, though she might still be as strong in defensive war. It is owing to the abundance of her exports, derived from her skill machinery and capital, that money rents and the money prices of corn and labour are high, and that with a small quantity of English labour a large quantity of the products of foreign labour is purchased. The demand for useful and beneficial personal services is limited; and after all these have been fully paid, would it not be an impoverishing and very disadvantageous exchange to substitute for the rich capitalists and comfortable and independent traders living upon the profits of stock, a body of dependents upon the landlords?' (Thomas Chalmers Collection, CHA4.i85.32).81 Similarly, in a letter of 16 February

80 Chalmers, 1832, 564: '29. That the superior influence of Britain over other nations in distant parts, is due to her exports; and that if, instead of her lighter manufactures, she had to export raw produce, her power in offensive war would be lessened, while she might continue as strong in defensive war as before; and that, therefore, the balance of power is a topic of needless and misplaced anxiety on the part of British statesmen.' 81 In an earlier letter to Chalmers of 1827, and subsequently in 1833, the case for 'manufacturing prosperity' is also reiterated; but it is not made explicit that expanded exports are intended: 'I agree with you in much of what you say about the wealth derived from manufactures, but I think ... you have pushed your principle too far. I feel strongly persuaded that without our manufacturing prosperity, we should not have had the

862 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

1833 to Chalmers, Malthus wrote: 'Do not manufactures and commerce increase the Revenue of a country, and enlarge the returning power? I own I cannot but think that if the taste for luxuries and superior conveniences were at an end, the cultivation of the land would be essentially deteriorated, - at least under the present division of landed property. How could the actual number of labourers have an adequate demand for the produce of the soil, if commerce and manufactures were greatly to be diminished? What numbers would be out of work! What constant calls for an extension of Poor Laws, and of all public and private charities!!' (CHA4.21O.5). This is much the same point that Malthus had already made in i824.82 There were indeed earlier allusions, even in 1815, to the significance of manufacturing, including the export sector, for the maintenance of activity to the advantage of agriculture itself (cf. Inquiry into Rent, i8i5b/i986, 7, 130). But now this theme is reiterated forcefully with an eye to the growing significance of the export sector; and it is no longer part of a protectionist case to assure sectoral balance in an economy 'naturally' becoming predominantly industrial, but rather part of a free-trade case justifying such imbalances. In his evidence before the Commons Select Committee on Emigration on 5 May 1827, Malthus commented thus on the view that low wages are favourable to trade and commerce: 'In one respect it is, and in one respect not; it may enable the capitalist to work up his commodities cheaper, and to extend his foreign trade, but it certainly will have a tendency to diminish the home trade, and I think the home trade much more important than the foreign' (House of Commons, Parliamentary Papers, 1827, Vol. V, 317, Question 3285). This seems to suggest no change whatsoever in Malthus's original 'physiocratic' stance.83 However, Malthus was con-

same disposable population, and certainly not the same power of commanding the labour, the provisions, and the armies of Europe. We might have driven Buonaparte from this country if he had invaded us, but we could not have driven him out of Spain' (18 January 1827; CHAj.So.ig). 82 It is pertinent that the free-trade position outlined in Chalmers's Political Economy, which Malthus applauded, also emphasizes the desirability of an expanded manufacturing sector - a consideration which implied increased agricultural imports: 'The limit of our imports determines the limit of our exports; so that when the one trade comes to its ne plus ultra, the other must also be brought to a dead stand. They mutually limit and determine each other. So that the advantage to our export commerce, from a further enlargement of our imports, opening, as it would, a fuller and freer exportation, and telling most favourably for this great branch of trade upon the foreign exchanges, is really one of the most urgent forces that is now operating on the side of an unrestricted corn trade' (1832, 524). 83 In fact, Pullen compares the statement with a much earlier comment in an 1808 review of William Spence (often mistakenly attributed to Malthus) that 'the internal commerce of a country is of infinitely greater consequence than its external' (1989, xix). Equally, it might be compared with a similar formulation of 1815, cited above, p. 834.

AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION 863

cerned here to emphasize that 'the extent of the effectual demand for the manufactures and commodities consumed at home, depends essentially upon the good condition of the labouring classes' (p. 317, Question 3282) .84 His comment compares the positive effect on demand of expanded exports via wage reductions with the fall in domestic demand entailed by wage reductions, a theme foreign to earlier formulations, with their emphasis on the advantage of high expenditure out of rent. And his new position is wholly in line with the change apparent in the Essay on Population from the earlier editions, where workers were not seen to benefit from expansion of manufactured output, to the later editions, which allow a significant weight to manufactures in the working-class budget (see Gilbert, 1980). That Malthus came to modify his agricultural bias requires further attention. The problem is that, despite the various omissions from the second edition of the Principles (above, section IX), there was no wholesale and consistent rejection of physiocratic doctrine (see chapter 8). But it is fair to say that there occurred a dilution of the physiocratic component to Malthus's thought, even if it is not adequately reflected in the Principles.^ The causal sequence may, however, have been the reverse - the undermining of agricultural protectionism on the various grounds documented in this chapter obliging a continuous questioning of physiocratic perceptions. In all likelihood, the sequences were mutually reinforcing. More generally, from the viewpoint of labour's welfare, there is evidence of a new emphasis discernible in the 1817 Essay on industry-biased growth as typically characteristic of the later stages of economic development, and, along with it, the retraction of much of an earlier concern with such growth from labour's perspective (see above, p. 841). The evidence given in this chapter points to the implications for trade policy of this orientation. Gilbert hesitates to see this transition as indicating Malthus's 'evolution ... from an apologist for agricultural interests to a an apologist for industrial interests'; there is nothing, he writes, 'like the pro-industrial bias or sympathy so transparent in Ricardo or other "mainstream" British classicists'; it was a matter rather of 'a more balanced view of industrial and agricultural growth as potential contributors to working class welfare' (1980, 95). The issue of 'apologetics' seems out of place. But it does appear, from the evidence provided in this chapter, that Malthus had in fact thrown in his lot with the Ricardians.

84 Moreover, on a utilitarian calculus, the 'general condition' of the labourers was 'the most important of all' (p. 317, Question 3281) - the standard classical position. 85 Or for that matter in 1824. Thus we have the restatement of the formal physiocratic position regarding surplus in the 1824 review (above, p. 849). But we have also seen that a case for pro-agricultural intervention is positively denied.

864 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

Can Mai thus's new policy position be explained to a degree by increasing pessimism regarding British agricultural prospects? As we have seen in chapter 15, p. 762, Malthus justified corn-import restriction in the 1817 Essay (repeated in 1826) in part because of buoyant prospects for ongoing accumulation and population growth at steady - even rising - real wages and without pressure on the profit rate; matters would be different where an economy approached stationariness: 'In such a state of the soil, the British empire might unquestionably be able not only to support from its own agricultural resources its present population, but double, and in time, perhaps, even treble the number; and consequently a restriction upon the importation of foreign corn, which might be thought greatly objectionable in a country which had reached nearly the end of its resources, might appear in a very different light in a country capable of supporting from its own lands a very great increase in population' (1817, II, 494). Hilton has suggested that the doctrine of rent and diminishing returns 'could explain the government's move away from autarchy and protection in 1821' (1977, 121-2); more strongly, diminishing returns 'permeated' Huskisson's freetrade report, having in mind the periodic need for upward adjustment of the protection price (119). Now this latter consideration had indeed been specified by Malthus in 1814 as one objection to the proposed Corn Bill (1986, 7, 107-8). When he made out his protectionist case in 1815, he took account of other, overriding arguments. These arguments by the mid-i820s were in the course of becoming obsolete. But is there evidence that, with the waining of those other concerns, Mai thus formally reinstated the principle of diminishing returns as a major part of the case for free trade? Were we to focus solely on the Essay on Population, this possibility would not be strong. For the 1826 edition is as optimistic regarding secular prospects as were the earlier editions; indeed, loose predictions made in 1806 and 1807 of a deceleration of food supply setting in within some three or four decades are extended in 1826 to a full century ahead (see above, p. 802). However, several of the revisions for the second edition of the Principles (above, section IX) suggest a different story. These include the removal: (i) of the justification for protection on the grounds that permanent agricultural improvements effectively add to the land supply, and related statements (applied to Britain) regarding prospective agricultural-based growth proceeding for 'hundreds of years' without decline in the profit rate; and (2) of the proposition that 'a great demand for corn of home growth must tend greatly to encourage improvements in agriculture.' It may seem from this that, in approaching the new attitude towards industry-based growth, some allowance should be made for a re-evaluation of agricultural prospects - a re-evaluation which would imply the further undermining of physiocratic bias. Yet this conclusion must be stated with caution. Our full account in chapter 15 shows that the revisions to the

AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION 865

chapter on Rent yield no consistent pattern, while the subsequent chapters, on Profits and on the Progress of Wealth, reveal no changes at all.

A moral dimension might be relevant in our exploration. For Chalmers, that dimension outweighed any political dangers inherent in dependence on foreign food supplies, entailing avoidance of 'the certain and urgent evil of a dissatisfied population; who feel, and perhaps with justice too, as if defrauded of their rights, by the compulsory restraints of the legislature on the importation of food' (1832, 533~4), or again: 'Let the freedom of this trade be restored perfectly, though progressively - that government may withdraw itself from the obnoxious attitude of appearing to stand in the way of the people's subsistence. Let this semblance of hostility between the governors and the governed be for ever obliterated; for, however insignificant the material, the moral benefit that would ensue is incalculable' (539) .^ As we know Malthus approved of this perspective in 1832 (above, p. 854). Whether it was a consideration in 1824-6 is an open possibility, for he implicitly raised the question of morality in 1823 m his sharp objections to the proposal by landlords to adjust contracts to their own benefit (above, pp. 855-6) .8? One final matter may be mentioned by way of hypothesis. We have seen in part I that, throughout the 1815-16 period - especially in correspondence - Malthus was expressing the view that agricultural protection would act to stimulate the profit rate and consequently growth (paradoxical as it might seem). In the Principles this line is absent, and in fact replaced by a sort of corn-model analysis. This theoretical transition might conceivably be relevant to the policy transformation.

86 Whether the real advantage to labour would be a permanent one depended on the practice of prudential population control. 87 A word here regarding the suggestion by Winch that Malthus's 'unhappiness' with the results of the 1815 Corn Law reflected the unrest accompanying the passage of the bill (above, note 4). The fact is that the rioting of 1815 did not dissuade Malthus; he saw this as a matter of principle. On the March 1815 London riots, Ricardo had written to Malthus: The opposition to the bill is more formidable than I expected ... I regret that the people should have proceeded to acts of riot and outrage' (9 March 1815; 1951-73, VI, 180). Malthus responded: 'The riots of course should not be regarded' (10 March; 183). He did, on the other hand, allow that 'a neglect of such numerous petitions may in many respects be a bad precedent.' Again, this time to Horner on 14 March 1815: 'I remain firm in my opinion as to the Policy of some Restrictions, but tho I would not yield to the mob, I should be disposed to yield to the prodigious weight of Petitions, and let the people have their way' (188; see also a letter to John Murray, 8 March 1815, Murray Archives). The numerous petitions in 1825 (see> e -g-> House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates, N.S., 13: 25 April, 142-9, 150-62; 26 April, 165-70, 171; 28 April, 247-9, 249-98) might well have exerted some influence.

866 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE XI

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

Mai thus's transition to free agricultural trade constitutes his positive response to the government's new liberal trade program with its promise of major expansion of British manufacturing exports - assuming the removal of barriers to corn imports - and his recognition of a contemporary absorption into the industrial sector of surplus agricultural capital and labour. The new liberal policy also undermined that part of his original concern with industry structure reflecting artificial stimuli accorded manufactures. More is in question than a change of perception regarding the state of the contemporary economy, although growing concern with land scarcity may have played a role in addition to the alteration in government policy. For much of Malthus's original protectionism reflected 'agricultural bias,' including a concern to prevent the disproportionate expansion of industry, even in a freely operating system. A fundamental reorientation of analytical perspective seems to be involved - renunciation of the case for balanced growth in favour of industry-based growth, and growing dissatisfaction with physiocratic conceptions, including the dependency of expenditure levels on the magnitude of rental incomes. That Malthus championed free trade solely on the cosmopolitan grounds of international morality may also be dismissed. Although the note of 1826 argues for free trade in terms of net universal advantage, the specifics of the case suggest that Malthus also envisaged prospective net advantages for Britain. He may not have abandoned entirely his secular concern with the reliability of foreign sources of food supply, but this was now given a sufficiently low weight to be outweighed by the advantages of new openings in the more immediate future for British manufacturing exports, in conjunction with the long-recognized efficiency advantages of free trade. Malthus conveyed his new position to at least three of his contemporaries (Senior, Chalmers, and Marcet); it is they who apparently did not spread the word. Moreover, his 1824 article is clear enough, as are his 1823 charges against landowners. It is the fault of reader if they did not get the message or chose not to broadcast it. But it remains true that the note of 1826 is scarcely a conspicuous location to spell out his new position, especially since the text to which it is attached remained unchanged. Since no one apparently referred to his renunciation of agricultural protection, why did not Malthus correct the oversight of his contemporaries? Was it perhaps so trifling a change that it could be left quiescent?88 Or could Torrens have been mistaken in saying of Malthus that he 'possesse[d], in a very eminent degree, a spirit of candour and a love of truth' (1815, xi); or Ricardo, when he wrote of Malthus that 'a more candid or better man nowhere exists,' whose 'erroneous opinions respecting the expediency of 88 I owe these questions to the late George Stigler.

AGRICULTURAL PROTECTION 867

a free trade in corn ... are honest conscientious opinions' (13 October 1819; 1951-73, VIII, 101)? After all, several notable parliamentary figures did convert regarding the merits of the 1815 act and in many cases made no bones about it (see appendix C). There is perhaps a hint of a lessening of concern with the policy question. For the problem 'whether a balance between the agricultural and commercial classes of society, which would not take place naturally, ought, under certain circumstances, to be maintained artificially' was described in 1817 as 'the most important practical question in the whole compass of political economy'; whereas this is modified in 1826 to read simply 'a most important practical question' (1986, 3, 424). This, however, does not carry us all the way, since the change in policy itself seems to reflect, or at least parallel, a deeper analytical reorientation. The problem, I suggest, must be approached in terms of Malthus's failure to complete the second edition of the Principles, for had he himself published the revised version - and explicitly pointed out the deletions of protectionist passages - the new view could not possibly have remained a public secret. In the event, the second edition evinced little interest, and the nature and import of the revisions have been camouflaged by the lack of a variorum edition. The only major notice was that by Empson for the Edinburgh Review (1837), and he missed entirely the import of the changes documented in this chapter: 'In substance and in doctrine, it contains the principles of Political Economy taught by Mr. Malthus' (1837/1963, 234). This is simply misleading. If my case is well made out, Malthus's procrastination may reflect his need to absorb the full implications of the theoretical and policy reorientation, a problem not faced by the politicians. And more than the usual courage would have been required to undertake a concerted campaign to spread the word.89 For after 1815 Malthus was all but blacklisted by the Edinburgh Review because of his prohibitionism, and he was obliged to turn to the ultra-Tory Quarterly Review. Had he announced his new position with a fanfare, he would in all likelihood have been subject to virulent charges of treachery.90 His unwillingness to go farther than he did to broadcast his new position is not difficult to appreciate in these terms.91 89 For other possible explanations of the delay in completing the new edition, see Pullen, 1989, lix-lx, Ixviii-lxix. 90 Fetter provides the context: 'Blackwood's, attacking the Tories when they appeared to have been influenced in 1826 by the free trade teachings of the economists, said: "The man [Huskisson] who yesterday could not number his own toes has been magically transmuted by Political Economy and Philosophy into a statesman of the first order" ... The Quarterly, after it became clear that political economists were almost unanimous in opposition to the Corn Laws, left no doubt that its opinion of them agreed with Blackwood's. Robert Southey wrote [1831, 277]: "No professors, even in the subtlest ages of scholastic philosophy, were ever more successful in muddying what they found clear, and perplexing what is itself intelligible"' (i965b, 431). 91 A final consideration regarding Malthus's intellectual honesty is taken up in Conclusion: VIII.

868 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

APPENDIX A: SIZE, SECTOR DISTRIBUTION OF THE GAINFUL LABOUR FORCE, AND LABOUR-PARTICIPATION RATIOS, GREAT BRITAIN, 1780-1851

Date

Size of labour force (millions)

Agriculture, Manufactur- Trade and forestry, ing, mining, transport and fishing and industry (%) (%) (%)

1780 1801 1811 1821 1831 1841 1851

4.0 4.8 5.5 6.2 7.2 8.4 9.7

35.9 33.0 28.4 24.6 22.2 21.7

29.7 30.2 38.4 40.8 40.5 42.9

11.1 11.6 12.1 12.4 14.2 15.8

Domestic and personal (%)

Public, professional, & all other (%)

Labour participadon ratio (%)

11.5 11.8 12.7 12.6 14.5 13.0

11.8 13.3 8.5 9.5 8.5 6.7

45.7 45.8 44.0 44.2 45.4 46.6

Source: Tranter, 1981, 206

APPENDIX B: DIGEST OF MAJOR CORN LAWS1 1660

1663

1670

Import:

Above 44$. Below 445.

Nominal duty of 4 1245-6). On 17 April 1826 he made out a case for free trade in corn on grounds of reduced tariffs on cottons (/5, 342-51). In his first free-trade budget, he emphasized the quantitative significance of cotton exports in defending his new policy, and alluded to the encouragement afforded agriculture by the buoyancy of industrial activity (8 March 1824, 10, 800, 803-7). On this feature of government policy - relating the fortunes of agriculture to that of commerce - see Hilton, 1977, 150. On Huskisson as a free trader, see also Smart, 1910-17, II, 289-90; and on Huskisson's alteration of position, see Allington, 1977. Alexander Baring refers to Huskisson and to the Chancellor of the Exchequer (FJ. Robinson) as changing their positions on the 1815 system (18 March 1824, 10, 1221, 1222-3, 1229-30; 28 April 1825, 13, 288-98). One MP referred to Robinson as a 'deserter' (10, 1230-1). In the debate of 8 March 1827, in reply to Brougham's question whether Lord Liverpool and the Chancellor had changed their minds, the Chancellor - who quotes from Lord Liverpool's address in 1815 on British national interests - replied that indeed he had (16, 1041-3). In the same debate, Sir Robert Peel justified his own change of heart (1064-9). The Earl of Darnley, speaking in the House of Lords, 11 May 1826, is paraphrased thus: 'what might be good in 1815, was not therefore good in 1826' (75, 1082-3). Sir Henry Parnell - a strong champion of prohibition in 1815 - called for full-fledged free trade in 1825 (25 March, 12, 1229-32; 17 June, 13, 1222-42) and elaborated further on his change of mind on 9 March 1827, 16, 1101-5. Semmel (1970, 138) refers to Parnell's 'conversion' in 1827, but neglects the 1825 statements. Henry Brougham changed his mind on the Corn Laws in 1826 - 'The present system was never intended as a final arrangement' - but he called for the replacement of effective import prohibition by a protective duty (75, 367; see Sockwell, 1994, 4i). The government was frequently charged with inconsistency for not acting vigorously to abolish the Corn Laws, considering its broader free-trade objectives (e.g., Baring, 8 March 1824, 10, 814-15; 18 March 1824, w, 1222-3; 25 March 1825, 12, 1226; Whitmore, 28 April 1825, I3> 249-98; Ellice, 5 March 1824, 10, 738-9; February 1826, 14, 156-7; Burdett, 6 March 1826, 14, 1113-9). Parnell, in his June 1825 speech, maintained that the schedules were 'wholly at variance with the principles of "open competition" laid down.'

EIGHTEEN

Social reform and the role of government

I

INTRODUCTION

Marx identified the Malthusian population doctrine with the 'iron law of wages' and read it as precluding social improvement under any form of institutional arrangement, whether capitalist or socialist (see Baumol, 1983, 306). The notion of an infinitely elastic labour supply at an exogenous wage is alive and well even in the non-Marxian literature, leading to the obvious question: 'Why did [Malthus] devote so much effort in the Principles to analysing the causes of economic progress, if any increase in material wealth is soon to be overtaken by an increase of population which reduces the average standard of living back to the subsistence level?' (Pullen, igSia, 53) In some instances a spectrum of Malthusian doctrines is recognized, with Malthus himself located at various points along it from the 'hard' to the 'soft' end (Hutchison, 1978, 73), and his abandonment of the hard-line version - the adoption of a psychological in place of a physiological long-run labour supply curve - identified in the second edition of the Essay on Population (cf. Robbins, 1952, 77; for an early version seeJ.S. Mill 1848/1965, III, 753). But even so, the hard-line version is said to be analytically essential both for the construction of the 'canonical' classical growth model and for providing that model with any meaningful empirical content (e.g., Schumpeter, 1954, 569, 580; Blaug, 1958, 111, 120-1; Sowell, 1962; Stigler, 1965; Hutchison, 71; Blaug, 1985, 71; Stigler, 1981). The notion that hard-line Malthusianism is essential to classical growth theory is very much mistaken. Only in the absence of prudential restraint is the corn-wage path inevitably downwards, assuming land scarcity, whereas the practice of prudential restraint permits progress towards the stationary state at a constant, even rising, per-capita wage. The rather derogatory

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 873

reaction in the secondary literature to Malthus's allowances for prudential behaviour reflects a failure to appreciate the dynamic nature of his modelbuilding — a tendency to interpret his growth-oriented perspective with the use of static tools (the standard wage, population coordinates), coupled with an unfortunate presumption that specific historical prediction provides the raison d'etre for model-building in economics, which neglects its role of providing a classificatory framework for purposes of policy recommendation, a procedure tracing out, not what mil happen, but what can happen under alternative reaction patterns. (In some cases, this latter is compounded by a word-minded confusion of Malthusian positive and normative economics.) The first object of this chapter is to consider Malthus's specific policy objectives — namely, both 'high' wages and an increasing population, and the arguments supporting their compatibility (section II). Here we recall from Part I a restraint on the population growth rate apart from, or in addition to, decreasing productivity resulting from permanent land scarcity - namely, the requirement for time-consuming investment to render land fit for cultivation. Account was thus to be taken of the time dimension in defining productivity; a doubling of population, which may involve a falling marginal product if accomplished in ten years, can be attained with a lesser reduction if twenty years are allowed. The necessity for preliminary preparation suggests that, even should land scarcity not yet be manifest, the system runs into a form of temporary diminishing returns, and a fortiori over the stretch involving declining marginal productivity. One outcome of the modification is that - failing land improvement at each absolute population size the maximum population growth rate consistent with a given corn wage falls short of the potential rate. Second, the stationary state is reached at a lower population, although with time and allowing for the appropriate land improvements, the maximum level can be achieved. Now the policy objective discussed in Section II (a 'large' population at 'high' wages) turns critically on the notion of preparatory land improvement. For a given population size, assuming it to be desirable, otherwise possible only at low wages, may be achieved under more favourable conditions allowing for the foregoing type of improvement. Such improvement, it turns out, is most likely to occur where the age distribution of population favours a high proportion of healthy adults and is precluded by too rapid population expansion. From this perspective, population control becomes a measure to raise productivity, and thus allow for future expansion of population, which would not be necessarily at the cost of reduced wages. In section III we expand on the sense of Malthus's 'pessimism.' The conclusion reached in chapter 16 regarding the contemporary 'population problem' will be recalled - namely, that even under conditions of accelerating food supplies - such as was manifest in recent experience - constraint of population growth below its maximum potential was essential to

874 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

assure against a depression of living standards, a constraint which was consistent with an acceleration of population growth. Our concern now is specifically with social policy, and in this context we find Malthus (quite reasonably) adopting a more conservative or cautionary stance, which, despite the experience of impressive technological progress, presumes increasing land scarcity and the need for time-consuming land improvements. Under these circumstances there was a need for an appropriate deceleration of the rate of population growth to assure against a fall in living standards. But even this is far removed from any prediction of inevitable deterioration. What follows in the present chapter expands on Malthus's reformism. That Malthus was not the 'reactionary' he is often made out to be has been convincingly argued by Levy (1978; see also 1996), who bases his case on statements indicating that Malthus came ultimately to recognise a trade-off between the 'misery' deriving from early marriage and large families, and the 'vice' attached to delayed marriage, and considered the latter as the lesser of two evils. In fact, already in 1798 he had intimated a deliberate preference for prudence - albeit accompanied by vice - as an alternative to misery, though not as clearly as in later editions. Furthermore, since (as Levy points out) Malthus was never to put great faith in 'moral restraint' - delayed marriage and abstinence from sexual relations - the somewhat greater optimism regarding future prospects in later editions is largely unrelated to the allowance for moral restraint strictly defined. These matters are dealt with in sections IV and V. The former touches on Malthus's allowance in 1798 for a psychological supply price of labour, his preference on moral ground for prudence (though implying vice) over poverty, and his rather high hopes for prudential behaviour and for high wages in a private-property system. The latter shows the transition from the first Essay to involve a reinforcement, not a new statement, of the preference for prudence over poverty, with the moral cost-benefit calculation now very clearly spelled out. Thereafter I take up the more general issue of the role of government in economic activity. The stage is set in section VI by reference to various generalities laid down in the Introduction of the Principles warning against adherence - even formal adherence - to unqualified laissez-faire. But to discern Malthus's own position on particulars we must return to the Essay. Section VII expands on labour policy, pointing to a higher degree of interventionism in later versions compared with the 1798 Essay, including the extraordinarily 'un-Malthusian' case for family allowances under favourable conditions. Malthus's reformist perspective is then placed in a broader intellectual framework, involving issues relating to social control, including religion and education. Himmelfarb (1984, 122) paints too dark a picture when she insists of the later editions that 'Malthus, himself, even while delivering those tidings [regarding moral restraint], was unable to throw off the "melancholy" induced by the law of population. The revision

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 875

of his thesis was only partial and hypothetical. Moral restraint was an addendum to misery and vice; it supplemented but did not supersede them. And it supplemented them not in the present but in some remote and problematic future.' Examination of the specifics of Malthus's recommendations confirms a secular utilitarian perspective. The same holds true of Malthus's case for a more equal income distribution (section VIII). This utilitarian dimension will be carried over to chapter 19, where we elaborate on Malthus's theodicy and its economic implications. Throughout I shall indicate the edition in which each passage on which I base my case first appears. This exercise reveals that Malthus's insistence not to push hard-line policy conclusions too far, intimated even in 1798, was well established by 1803. Our story is thus not one of a belated mellowing. II

POLICY OBJECTIVES: 'HIGH' WAGES AND POPULATION GROWTH

Marx's famous charge that Mai thus 'condemned the worker to death from starvation, and to celibacy' (1862-3/1968, II, 119) is a parody. Malthus himself gave the reply to this charge in 1803 and all later editions: 'This prudential restraint, if it were generally adopted, by narrowing the supply of labour in the market, would, in the natural course of things, soon raise its price. This period of delayed gratification would be passed in saving the earnings which were above the wants of a single man, and in acquiring habits of sobriety, industry and economy, which would enable him, in a few years, to enter into the matrimonial contract without fear of its consequences. The operation of the preventive check in this way, by constantly keeping the population within the limits of the food, though constantly following its increase, would give a real value to the rise of wages ...' (1986, 5, 475). 'The object of those who really wish to better the condition of the lower classes of society, must be to raise the relative proportion between the price of labour and the price of provisions, so as to enable the labourer to command a larger share of the necessaries and comforts of life. We have hitherto principally attempted to attain this end by encouraging the married poor, and consequently increasing the number of labourers, and overstocking the market with a commodity, which we still say that we wish to be dear ... It is really time now to try something else' (485-6). Reduction of the birth rate was the key to increased wages, and one of the desirable consequences of the improved conditions would be reduced mortality. Exogenous improvements in health, including vaccination, which cut the mortality rate, were championed, subject to a compensatory reduction in the birth rate to prevent an excessive growth rate of population. In 1806 Malthus introduced a protest against blatant misinterpretations of his position on this matter:

876 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

In many parts of the Essay I have dwelt much on the advantage of rearing the requisite population from the smallest number of births. I have stated expressly, that a decrease of mortality of all ages is what we ought chiefly to aim at; and as the best criterion of happiness and good government, instead of the largeness of the proportion of births, which was the usual mode of judging, I have proposed the smallness of the proportion dying under the age of puberty. Conscious that I have never intentionally deviated from these principles, I might well be rather surprised to hear that I had been considered by some as the enemy to the introduction of the vaccine inoculation, which is calculated to attain the very end which I have uniformly considered as so desirable. I have indeed intimated what I still continue most firmly to believe, that if the resources of the country would not permanently admit of a greatly accelerated rate of increase in the population (and whether they would or would not, must certainly depend upon other causes besides the number of lives saved by the vaccine inoculation), one or two things would happen, either an increased mortality of some other diseases, or a diminution in the proportion of births. But I have expressed my conviction that the latter effect would take place; and therefore consistently with the opinions which I have always maintained, I ought to be, and am, one of the warmest friends to the introduction of the cow-pox. In making every exertion which I think likely to be effectual, to increase the comforts and diminish the mortality of the poor, I act in the most exact conformity to my principles. (1806, II, 513-15) From 1803 on Malthus downplayed fears that wage increases achieved by prudential restraints on labour supply would damage competitiveness in foreign markets: 'If at some future period any approach should be made towards the more general prevalence of prudential habits with respect to marriage among the poor, from which alone any permanent and general improvement of dieir condition can arise, I do not think that the narrowest politician need be alarmed at it, from the fear of its occasioning such an advance in the price of labour as will enable our commercial competitors to undersell us in foreign markets' (1986, 5, 568).l Malthus here presumes the abolition of the poor-relief system, and consequently both a higher efficiency of labour (once freed of the nefarious consequences of that system) and a lower tax burden. More important, there would be savings of resources otherwise lost in supporting children 'who die prematurely, from the consequences of poverty,' and the average price of food would be reduced 'from the demand being less frequently above the supply.' l See, however, Pullen, 1982, 27611, regarding the rather more qualified position of the Principles: 'Prudential habits with regard to marriage carried to a considerable extent, among the labouring classes of a country mainly dependent upon manufactures and commerce, might injure it.' This position was cited by Marx, 1965, I, 634. Any such concerns would be reduced when reference is made to 'the cost of producing the precious metals.

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 877

It would, however, be an error to suggest that Malthus favoured a stationary state (even at high wages) as the ideal. He certainly wanted 'a market rather understocked with labour' (488), but not 'in such a degree as to affect the wealth and prosperity of the country,' an allusion to aggregative indexes. It was 'of the very utmost importance to the happiness of mankind, that they should not increase too fast' (472) - not that population should be stationary. For, as he explained in 1806, he favoured growth of population at 'high' wages: 'It is an utter misconception of my argument to infer that I am an enemy to population. I am only an enemy to vice and misery, and consequently to that unfavourable proportion between population and food which produces these evils. But this unfavourable proportion has no necessary connection with the quantity of absolute population which a country may contain. On the contrary, it is more frequendy found in countries which are very thinly peopled, than in those which are populous' (1806, II, 507-8). His critics had failed to appreciate that the proposed program of checks to the birth rate, designed to avoid 'poverty and premature mortality,' was consistent with population expansion, and had erroneously supposed 'that the ultimate object of my work is to check population, as if anything could be more desirable than the most rapid increase of population unaccompanied by vice and misery. But of course my ultimate object is to diminish vice and misery, and any checks to population which may have been suggested, are solely as means to accomplish this end. To a rational being, the prudential check to population ought to be considered as equally natural with the check from poverty and premature mortality which these gentlemen [his critics] seem to think so entirely sufficient and satisfactory; and it will readily occur to the intelligent reader, that one class of checks may be substituted for another, not only without essentially diminishing the population of a country, but even under a constantly progressive increase of it' (515-16). What of the internal consistency of the desiderata alluded to in the foregoing passage? The key to higher standards, as we know, is a reduction in the birth rate by way of postponed marriage; and such a program would be consistent with achieving population increase, assuming a reduced mortality rate: 'Two or three years in the average age of marriage, by lengthening each generation, and tending, in a small degree, both to diminish the prolifickness of marriages, and the number of born living to be married, may make a considerable difference in the rate of increase, and be adequate to allow for a considerably diminished mortality' (536-7; see also chapter i, p. 60). Moreover, the potential for productivity increase (attributable inter alia to land improvement) is greater in the case of a population comprising a high proportion of healthy adults; the program, by altering the age distribution, would result ultimately in the creation of 'fresh resources' for the support of population growth under relatively favourable circumstances: 'Without a diminished proportion of births, we cannot attain any permanent improvement in the health and happiness of

878 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

the mass of the people, and cannot secure that description of population, which, by containing a larger share of adults, is best calculated to create fresh resources, and consequently to encourage a continued increase of efficient population' (550; see chapter i, p. 61 ). 2 A strong confirmation of the significance of the quality of human capital is provided by a warning given in the Letter to Samuel Whitbread (1807) against any careless extension of the Poor Laws which would remove the stimulus to prudence: 'as it is physically impossible for the natural and acquired resources of any country long to support an unrestricted population, we should soon see a most unfavourable change take place in the present small mortality, which we justly consider as one of the great tests of our national happiness; and a large proportion of deaths would invariably accompany the large proportion of births. The births however might still exceed the deaths, the population might still be increasing, but the character of it would be greatly changed; it would consist of a much larger proportion of persons not capable of adding by their exertions to the resources of the state; each generation would pass away in a more rapid succession; and the greatness of the mortality would sufficiently indicate the misery of the state of the society' (iSoyb/igSG, 4, 15; emphasis added). Schumpeter must have been unaware of these texts when he charged Mai thus with failing 'to discuss any effects of his moral restraint other than the effect on numbers - for example, effects on the quality of the population, or on schemes for motivation' (1954, 580). The immediate policy implications are unambiguous. An increase in population size that is otherwise achievable only at low wages might with patience be attained with no deterioration. And as Malthus expressed it in 1806, 'there is no man who has the slightest feeling for the happiness of the most numerous class of society, or has even just views of policy on the subject, who would not rather choose that the requisite population should be obtained by such a price of labour, combined with such habits, as would occasion a very small mortality, than from a great proportion of births, of which comparatively few would reach manhood' (1806, II, 55i-2n). It is clear that increased population increase was an objective; that the means to that end were either a high birth rate accompanied by low wages and high mortality, or a low birth rate accompanied by high wages and low mortality; and that Malthus unambiguously championed the latter alternative. 2 In this context we find some fine examples of a utility calculus: 'A young person saved from death is more likely to contribute to the creation of fresh resources than another birth. It is a great loss of labour and food to begin over again. And universally it is true, that under similar circumstances, that article will come the cheapest to market which is accompanied by fewest failures' (1806, II, 5i4n; 1803/1986, 3, 582). 'Every loss of a child from the consequences of poverty, must evidently be preceded and accompanied by great misery to individuals; and, in a public view, every child that dies under ten years of age, is a loss to the nation of all that had been expended in its subsistence till that period' (1986, 3, 565).

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 879

Various references to an increase in food supplies prior to an increase in population can be appreciated in these terms. Productivity increase reflecting investment in agricultural improvement is what Malthus apparently had in mind in 1803: 'We are not... to relax our efforts in increasing the quantity of provisions; but to combine another effort with it, that of keeping the population, when once it had been overtaken, at such a distance behind as to effect the relative proportion which we desire; and thus unite the two grand desiderata, a great actual population, and a state of society in which squalid poverty and dependence are comparatively but little known; two objects which are far from being incompatible' (1986, 3, 486). 'One objection that may be made to this plan [reduced population growth rate under conditions favourable to agricultural investment], is the diminution of population that it would cause. It is to be considered, however, that this diminution is merely relative; and when once this relative diminution has been effected, by keeping the population stationary, while the supply of food has increased, it might then start afresh, and continue increasing for ages, with the increase of food, maintaining always the same relative proportion to it. I can easily conceive that this country, with a proper direction of the national industry might, in the course of some centuries, contain two or three times its present population, and yet every man in the kingdom be much better fed and clothed that he is at present. While the springs of industry continue in vigour, and a sufficient part of that industry is directed to agriculture, we need be under no apprehensions of a deficient population ...' (488-9). These statements are so 'optimistic' as to suggest that population increase can be indefinitely maintained at constant wages, provided its rate of increase is suitably restrained. In that case stationary states will at most constitute temporary breathing stops. But in all likelihood this does not constitute Mai thus's considered opinion. At the outset of the Essay he had clarified that an unlimited potential to the expansion of food supplies was an unrealizable supposition; and this clarification is emphasized in the 1806 edition: 'I have allowed the produce of the earth to be unlimited which is certainly going too far' (1806, II, 516—17).3 In terms of our reconstruction, the potential for land preparation tends to weaken; even allowing for clearing, draining, hedging, and so forth - activities that cannot strictly be classified as 'technical change' - 'diminishing returns' cannot be entirely avoided. But exogenous technological change - reflecting new knowledge - must also be taken into account; and it appears that the constrained rate of increase of food supplies allowed for improvements of this kind too, so that falling agricultural productivity amounts to an

3 Cf: 'Of the possibility of increasing very considerably the effective population of this country, I have expressed myself in some parts of my work more sanguinely, perhaps, than, experience would warrant' (1806, II, 516; 1986, 3, 583).

880 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

empirical proposition incorporating all forces playing favourably and unfavourably on efficiency. Ultimately, then, growth must cease. Malthus certainly favoured population expansion, but he believed there to be absolute limits. It was his objective to assure that, in the stationary state, wages should be high. But 'ultimate' stationariness was a far-distant prospect; in the meantime population might grow without a fall in wages, provided its rate of increase was appropriately limited. Ill

ON MALTHUS'S 'PESSIMISM'

Malthus's 'pessimism' is considerably constrained on our reading. It amounts to the proposition that, in the absence of prudential or moral checks to the growth rate of population, average living standards must 'ultimately' fall. In this limited sense both the effect of land scarcity and the need for time-consuming land improvements are continuously making themselves felt. Second, the checks, to a degree, have their source in an awareness of this consequence. It has been held that Malthus neglected entirely 'the possibility that people may inhibit their reproductive powers for reasons totally unconnected with any foresight of difficulties in providing subsistence for children' (Flew, 1970, 37). Though this assertion is stated rather too strongly (in so far as Malthus appreciated that some men merely sought to avoid family responsibility), yet in this sense, too, population pressure would always be constantly felt - in the upper classes, fear of a 'fall in station'; and, in the lower, fear of actual poverty. These notions of population pressure are, however, not to be equated with actual population pressure in a literal sense of the term. Malthus in 1803 unfortunately retained the remark that 'there are few states in which there is not a constant effort in the population to increase beyond the means of subsistence. This constant effort as constantly tends to subject the lower classes of society to distress, and to prevent any great permanent amelioration of their condition' (1986, 5, 17) .4 But on his own terms a 'tendency' is not to be understood as a 'prediction' (see below, section IX). Similarly, he was asking for trouble by introducing a reference in 1817 to a 'natural tendency of population to increase beyond the powers of the earth to produce food for it' (1817, III, 412), when he himself was pointing out the solution, and at times emphasizing the actual significance of the checks to the birth rate, even under unfavourable circumstances: 'Universally, the practice of mankind on the subject of marriage has been much superior to their theories; and however frequent may have been the declamations on the duty of entering into this state, and the advantage of

4 In the first Essay, the formulation was stronger: 'Yet in all societies, even those that are the most vicious, the tendency to a virtuous attachment is so strong, that there is a constant effort towards an increase of population. This constant effort ..." (1986, /, 14).

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 881

early unions to prevent vice, each individual has practically found it necessary to consider of the means of supporting a family, before he ventured to take so important a step. That great vis medicatrix reipublicae, the desire of bettering our condition, and the fear of making it worse, has been constantly in action, and has been constantly directing people into the right road, in spite of all the declamations which tended to lead them aside. Owing to this powerful spring of health in every state, which is nothing more than an inference from the general course of the laws of nature, irresistibly forced on each man's attention, the prudential check to marriage has increased in Europe; and it cannot be unreasonable to conclude that it will still make further advances' (1803/1986, 3, 571). The full implication of the reference to 'declarations which tended to lead them aside' can be appreciated only if we have in mind Church doctrine regarding marriage as a remedy for fornication, based on St Paul's 1 Corinthians: 7, formulated in the Book of Common Prayer, and read at the marriage ceremony (Levy, 1992). Malthus's deflection of the religious case will be elaborated below, pp. 907—8. Paradoxically, even Malthus's 'pessimism' has an optimistic side to it, for it is precisely the 'tendency' of population to increase, in the sense of the desire for marriage and procreation, that assures the necessary motivation for (aggregate) expansion. For 'the desire of the means of subsistence would be comparatively confined in its effects, and would fail of producing that general activity so necessary to the improvement of the human faculties, were it not for the strong and universal effort of population, to increase with greater rapidity than its supplies' (1803/1986, 3, 471). Thus, while population 'should not increase too fast ... it does not appear, that the object to be accomplished would admit of any very considerable diminution in the desire of marriage. It is clearly the duty of each individual not to marry till he has a prospect of supporting his children; but it is at the same time to be wished, that he should retain undiminished his desire of marriage, in order that he may exert himself to realize this prospect, and be stimulated to make provision for the support of greater numbers' (472). IV

THE FIRST (1798) ESSAY: PRUDENCE VS POVERTY

Malthus's original objective in writing his Essay was, of course, to counter various Utopian reformers. A system of perfect equality - without private property and the marriage institution whereby couples bear the cost of raising their own children5 (more generally a system governed by 'benevolence' rather than 'self-interest') -would inevitably fail in consequence of

5 Cf. Levy, 1978, 272: 'In order to explain the decision to marry, the classics [following Smith] argued, we must explain the costs of children, since in a world without effective mechanical contraception children will regularly follow marriage.'

882 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

population pressure on scarce land (1986, /, 67-8; see chapter i: III). Failure of the experiment would lead to the re-establishment of a privateproperty system and the reinstitution of marriage, institutions which 'make every man provide for his own children,' thereby 'operating] in some respect, as a measure and guide, in the increase of population; as it might be expected that no man would bring beings into the world, for whom he could not find the means of support' (72). In all this Malthus made no serious attempt to consider prospects for population control under communal arrangements; unlike Godwin, he took for granted that people would not act with an eye to the social consequences of their private behaviour (Levy, 1978, 279). None the less, rejection of Utopian communism was not based upon the supposed inevitability of population pressure, as Marx represented the matter, but its supposed inevitability in the absence of an institutional framework which gives free rein to private calculation. (Even this abstracts from legal restraints; see below, p. 910.) Prudential behaviour, in brief, was a cultural variable, the advantage lying with the private-property system assuming always that it is allowed to function effectively. And precisely for this reason Malthus castigated the contemporary Poor Laws as an illthought-out stimulus to early marriage (1986, I, 32f.). A famous passage referring to 'reason' which asks man 'whether he may not bring beings into the world, for whom he cannot provide the means of subsistence' appears already in the first Essay (14). In fact, the operation of the preventive check characterized in varying degrees all classes in contemporary England (26). Delay of marriage in the highest rank was in order to prevent the expected reduction in 'fancied pleasures' that marriage and children would entail, and in that of gentlemen to prevent a fall in social rank occasioned by the costs of raising a family. 'The sons of tradesmen and farmers' were exhorted not to marry until able to support a family. As for the labourer: 'The labourer who earns eighteen pence a day, and lives with some degree of comfort as a single man, will hesitate a little before he divides that pittance among four or five, which seems to be but just sufficient for one. Harder fare and harder labour he would submit to, for the sake of living with the woman that he loves; but he must feel conscious, if he thinks at all, that, should he have a large family, and any ill luck whatever, no degree of frugality, no possible exertion of his manual strength, could preserve him from the heart-rending sensation of seeing his children starve, or of forfeiting his independence, and being obliged to the parish for their support' (27). There were yet stronger impediments in the case of the single unproductive labourer (menial servant), given the alternatives of high earnings and easy work that would have to be forgone: 'By much the greater part, therefore, deterred by [an] uninviting view of their future situation, content themselves with remaining single where they are' (28). Malthus was, moreover, very conscious of differences in cultural standards within the working class of the same country and at the same

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 883

period - clear evidence of a psychological minimum-supply price amenable to influence - and even emphasized the difficulty of lowering standards: 'In the different states of Europe there must be some variations in the proportion between the number of inhabitants, and the quantity of food consumed, arising from the different habits of living that prevail in each state. The labourers of the south of England are so accustomed to eat fine wheaten bread, they will suffer themselves to be half starved, before they will submit to live like the Scotch peasants. They might perhaps in time, by the constant operation of the hard law of necessity, be reduced to live even like the lower Chinese: and the country would then, with the same quantity of food, support a greater population. But to effect this must always be a most difficult, and every friend to humanity will hope, an abortive attempt' (49). And now to the principal point for us. By 'prudence' we are to understand delayed marriage, probably accompanied by vice: 'The effects ... of these [preventive] restraints upon marriage are but too conspicuous in the consequent vices that are produced in almost every part of the world; vices, that are continually involving both sexes in inextricable unhappiness' (28). Similarly, prudential considerations 'are calculated to prevent, and certainly do prevent, a very great number in all civilized nations from pursuing the dictate of nature in an early attachment to one woman. And this restraint almost necessarily, though not absolutely so, produces vice' (14). Yet notwithstanding, in the course of his case against the outdoor-relief system, Mai thus intimated a preference for prudence as a necessary evil for the sake of avoiding misery: 'Every obstacle in the way of marriage must undoubtedly be considered a species of unhappiness. But as from the laws of our nature some check to population must exist, it is better that it should be checked from a foresight of the difficulties attending a family, and the fear of dependent poverty, than that it should be encouraged, only to be repressed afterwards by want and sickness' (35). It may always be said that Malthus was specifically expressing a choice for delayed marriage over marriage at an early age (despite the concomitant vice) when early marriage is artificially encouraged, but did not commit himself when the choice was between delay of marriage (vice) and early marriage (misery) in a freely operating system. But considering the very explicit statements regarding the trade-off between vice and misery in later editions (below, pp. 887f.), one suspects that his position in 1798 was not thus limited. More important, there are strong indications to this effect in the 1798 Essay itself, in Mai thus's repeated championship of improved living standards, the maintenance of which almost necessarily entails the exercise of a higher degree of prudence - having in mind the near certainty that this restraint 'produces vice.' The choice of prudence over poverty is thus implicit in Malthus's rejection of the 'common complaint among master manufacturers that high wages ruin all their workmen,' on the grounds

884 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

that these men would 'save a part of their high wages for the future support of their families, instead of spending it in drunkenness and dissipation, if they did not rely on parish assistance for support in case of accidents' (34). Various 'palliatives' suggested by Malthus, including agricultural subsidies or 'premiums' and the encouragement of tillage relative to grazing, were designed to 'furnish the market with an increasing quantity of healthy work, and [which] at the same time, by augmenting the produce of the country, would raise the comparative price of labour, and ameliorate the condition of the labourer' (37). And a complaint against Godwin is that he failed to consider the potential of reforms beneficial to labour - apparently permanently so - within the private-property system: 'Perhaps there is no possible way in which wealth could, in general, be employed so beneficially to a state, and particularly to the lower orders of it, as by improving and rendering productive that land, which to a farmer would not answer the expense of cultivation. Had Mr. Godwin exerted his energetic eloquence in painting the superior worth and usefulness of the character who employed the poor in this way, to him who employed them in narrow luxuries, every enlightened man must have applauded his efforts. The increasing demand for agricultural labour must always tend to better the condition of the poor; and if the accession of work be of this kind, so far is it from being true, that the poor would be obliged to work ten hours, for the same price, that they before worked eight, that the very reverse would be the fact; and a labourer might then support his wife and family as well as by the labour of six hours, as he could before by the labour of eight' (106). Malthus did not, however, carry through with a far-reaching interventionist program.6 Apart from foreign-trade policy, it was by and large 'the generous system of perfect liberty adopted by Dr. Adam Smith and the French economists' that he relied upon (iO2n), for much was expected merely from the correction of faulty institutions.7 There is, it is true, the denial that living standards would be raised to any major degree: 'The principal argument against the perfectibility of man and society remains whole and unimpaired from any thing that [Godwin] has advanced. And as far as I can trust my own judgement, this argument appears to be conclusive, not only against the perfectibility of man, in the enlarged sense in which Mr. Godwin understands the term, but against any very marked and striking change for the better, in the form and structure of general society; by which I mean, any great and decided amelioration in the condition of the lower classes of mankind, the most numerous, and,

6 For an elaboration, see below, section VII. 7 For example, improved mobility with abolition of the poor laws would allow transfer 'wherever there was a prospect of a greater plenty of work, and a higher price for labour' (37).

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 885

consequently, in a general view of the subject, the most important part of the human race' (98; cf. also 36-7). But what precisely is intended by a 'great and decided' improvement? In this context it is one similar to recent North American standards: 'Were I to live a thousand years, and the laws of nature to remain the same, I should little fear, or rather little hope, a contradiction from experience, in asserting, that no possible sacrifices or exertions of the rich, in a country which had been long inhabited, could for any time place the lower classes of the community in a situation equal, with regard to circumstances, to the situation of the common people, about thirty years ago, in the northern states of America.' There is still considerable scope for improvement within these limits. Comparison with the American case indicates a related sense in which 'major' improvement is ruled out - namely, the impossibility of maintaining high standards without any concern whatsoever for the rate of population growth: 'The lower classes of people in Europe may, at some future period, be much better instructed than they are at present; they may be taught to employ the little spare time they have in many better ways than at the alehouse; they may live under better and more equal laws than they have ever hitherto done, perhaps, in any country; and I even conceive it possible, though not probable, that they may have more leisure; but it is not in the nature of things, that they can be awarded such a quantity of money or subsistence, as will allow them all to marry early, in the full confidence that they shall be able to provide with ease for a numerous family.' The denial of the possibility of any 'major' improvement in earnings may also be better appreciated by reference to the potential for a diminution of the 'passion between the sexes' (76). Godwin put his faith in the potentialities for intellectual improvement sufficient to weaken sexual passion, whereas Malthus thought him a dreamer, since 'no observable progress whatever has hitherto been made' (78), and prospects were bleak under the best of circumstances: 'Allowing, as I should be inclined to do ..., that great intellectual exertions tend to diminish the empire of this passion over man; it is evident that the mass of mankind must be improved more highly than the brightest ornaments of the species at present, before any difference can take place sufficient sensibly to affect population. I would by no means suppose that the mass of mankind has reached its term of improvement; but the principal argument of this essay tends to place in a strong point of view, the improbability, that the lower classes of people in any country, should ever be sufficiently free from want and labour, to obtain any high degree of intellectual improvement.' But to assert that the wage rate could never rise sufficiently to allow a 'sensible' diminution in sexual passion is not to deny more modest increases in living standards increases, of course, which could only be maintained by the exercise of prudence, notwithstanding that prudence 'almost necessarily ... produces vice.'

886 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE V

THE TRANSITION FROM 1798:

THE MORAL CALCULUS ELABORATED

By 'moral restraint' - the check to population growth formally introduced in the second edition of (1803) —was intended the restraint from marriage 'which is not followed by irregular gratifications' (1986, 2, 16) .8 Malthus himself pointed to the new check and its practical implications in the famous Preface to the second edition: 'Throughout the whole of the present work, I have so far differed in principle from the former, as to suppose the action of another check to population possible, which does not stricdy come under the head either of vice or misery; and, in the latter part, I have endeavoured to soften some of the harshest conclusions of the first essay. In doing this, I hope I have not violated the principles of just reasoning; nor expressed any opinion respecting the probable improvement of society, in which I am not borne out by the experience of the past. To those who shall still think that any check to population whatever, would be worse than the evils which it would relieve, the conclusions of the former essay will remain in full force; and if we adopt this opinion, we shall be compelled to acknowledge that the poverty and misery that prevail among the lower classes of society are absolutely irremediable' (iii) .9 This statement, which has done much to stamp the first Essay as a thoroughly depressing document, is misleading. Malthus had not shown in 1798 that 'the poverty and misery that prevail among the lower classes of society are absolutely irremediable' - only that they are so in the absence of prudence. And he had from the outset recommended delay of marriage despite the 'vicious' consequences. Equally important, the implications of 'moral restraint' must not be exaggerated. As David Levy has observed, 'the addition in the later editions of the possibility of moral restraint- the possibility of a chaste life outside of marriage — is not important for the positive economics,' since Malthus did not believe that the period before marriage would be spent chastely (1978, 280; cf. Coats, 1971, 163).

8 Cf. the explanatory note added in 1806 in response to criticism: 'It will be observed, that I here use the term moral in its most confined sense. By moral restraint I would be understood to mean a restraint from marriage, from prudential motives, with a conduct strictly moral during the period of this restraint; and I have never intentionally deviated from this sense. When I have wished to consider the restraint from marriage unconnected with its consequences, I have either called it prudential restraint, or a part of the preventive check, of which indeed it forms the principal branch' (1806, I, ig-2On; 1986, 2, i6n). James, 1979, 68-9, suggests there are hints of 'moral restraint' in Malthus's correspondence of 1798. The allowance in the first Essay itself that delayed marriage produces vice but 'not absolutely so' (above, p. 883) implies the notion of moral restraint. For an earlier observation to this effect see Fetter, 1898, 161. But Fetter went too far when he asserted that Malthus emphasized the restraint; it is largely prudential control that he then had in mind. 9 For an interesting discussion of 'What is moral restraint?' see Eversley, 1959, 244-9.

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 887

It is true enough that 'in economic theory a behavioural change that alters one of the parameters of a system in equilibrium is of interest solely because of its effect upon the value of that parameter. Whether that change is ethically good, bad or neutral is irrelevant to the new equilibrium values of the dependent variables' (Waterman, 1991, 137-8). But the point at the issue for us is precisely whether Malthus saw in his moral restraint an effective reinforcement of delayed marriage. He did not: 'In my review of the different stages of society,' Malthus added in 1806, 'I have been accused of not allowing sufficient weight in the prevention of population to moral restraint; but when the confined sense of the term, which I have here explained, is adverted to, I am fearful that I shall not be found to have erred much in this respect. I should be very glad to believe myself mistaken' (1806, I, son). Malthus doubted whether moral restraint would be generally practised. But while he regretted the 'evils and unhappiness, particularly to the female sex, arising from promiscuous intercourse,' so that it was impossible 'for any person, who acknowledges the principle of utility as the great foundation of morals, to escape the conclusion, that moral restraint, till we are in a condition to support a family, is the strict line of duty,' he added that 'few ... can be less sanguine in their expectations of any great change in the general conduct of men on this subject than I am' (1803/1986, 5, 482; but see 572, below, p. 889, for an apparently more optimistic view). To have allowed much weight in practice to 'moral restraint' would have been to concede too much to Godwin, and this Malthus did not do, despite the Preface of 1803.10 Even in the absence of moral restraint, runs the clear message, prudential delay of marriage was to be welcomed. Now the reason for this position is that misery also entails vice; on a balance of moral costs and benefits, prudence with 'irregular gratification' was preferable. Malthus, in brief, 'tolerated immoral restraint as the lesser of two evils' (Levy, 1978, 280). We shall review the evidence. Consider first the remarkable account introduced in 1803 of the 'vices' attached to poverty. These include crime:

10 Southey (1803, 299), early on, read the new essay as a weakening of the case against Godwin. More recently, Stigler also maintained that 'Malthus, capitulated, while still claiming victory ... Given the possible - though in Malthus' opinion the improbable efficacy of moral restraint, Godwin had carried this issue' (1965, 165). Waterman argues that, for Malthus, perfectibility is impossible without private-property institutions, for which reason nothing was conceded to Godwin (1991, 140-3). But in this context Waterman seems to confound simple 'prudence' with moral restraint. For Malthus, private-property institutions, including the marriage relation, play on 'prudential' behaviour, not 'moral' behaviour. (On this issue, see Levy, 1996, n 32.) It is noteworthy, though, that Godwin himself believed that 'virtue' would prevail in his Utopian society alone (Godwin, 1801, 72).

888 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE To the general prevalence of indigence, and the extraordinary encouragements which we afford in this country to a total want of foresight and prudence among the common people, is to be attributed the principal part" of those continual depredations on property, and other more atrocious crimes, which drive us to the painful resource of such a number of executions. According to Mr. Colquhoun, above twenty thousand miserable individuals of various classes, rise up every morning without knowing how or by what means they are to be supported during the passing day, or where, in many instances, they are to lodge on the succeeding night. It is by these unhappy persons that the principal depredations on the public are committed; and, supposing but few of them to be married, and driven to these acts from the necessity of supporting their children; yet still it will not cease to be true, that the too great frequency of marriage among the poorest classes of society is one of the principal causes of the temptations to these crimes. A considerable part of these unhappy wretches will probably be found to be the offspring of such marriages, educated in workhouses where every vice is propagated, or bred up at home in filth and rags, with an utter ignorance of every moral obligation. A still greater part perhaps consists of persons, who, being unable for some time to get employment owing to the full supply of labour, have been urged to these extremities by their temporary wants; and having thus lost their characters, are rejected even when their labour may be wanted, by the well-founded caution of civil society. (1986, 3, 490) Also included under 'vice' is the degradation of young girls: 'squalid poverty, particularly when joined with idleness, is a state the most unfavourable to chastity that can well be conceived. The passion is as strong, or nearly so, as in other situations; and every restraint on it from personal respect, or a sense of morality, is generally removed. There is a degree of squalid poverty, in which, if a girl was brought up, I should say that her being really modest at twenty was an absolute miracle. Those persons must have extraordinary minds indeed, and such as are not usually formed under similar circumstances, who can continue to respect themselves, when no other person whatever respects them. If the children thus brought up were even to marry at twenty, it is probable that they would have passed some years in vicious habits, before that period' (491-2). There follows a strong warning of the consequences of 'the vice of promiscuous intercourse' attached to mere prudence: 'If the prevalence of the preventive check to population in a sufficient degree were to remove many of those diseases, which now afflict us, yet be accompanied by a considerable increase of the vice of promiscuous intercourse, it is probable that the disorders and unhappiness, the physical and moral evils arising from this vice, would increase in strength and degree, and, admonishing

11 The 1986 edition fails to catch the true 1803 rendition, here writing 'a considerable part,' which is in fact the version introduced in 1807 (1807, II, 277).

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 889

us severely of our error, would point to the only line of conduct approved by nature, reason and religion, abstinence from marriage till we can support our children, and chastity till that period arrives' (495). Yet, notwithstanding, weighing the alternatives leads to an unambiguous conclusion: 'I should be most extremely sorry to say any thing which could either directly or remotely be construed unfavourably to the cause of virtue: but I certainly cannot think that the vices which relate to the sex, are the only vices which are to be considered in a moral question; or that they are even the greatest and the most degrading to the human character ... [T]here are other vices, the effects of which are still more pernicious; and there are other situations, which lead more certainly to moral offenses than the refraining from marriage. Powerful as may be the temptations to a breach of chastity, I am inclined to think that they are impotent, in comparison of the temptations arising from continued distress. A large class of women, and many men, I have no doubt, pass a considerable part of their lives in moral restraint; but I believe there will be found very few, who pass through the ordeal of squalid and hopeless poverty, or even of long continued embarrassed circumstances, without a considerable moral degradation of character' (489). The same estimate emerges in a comment on an observed increase in checks to marriage in contemporary Europe Norway, Switzerland, as well as England and Scotland: 'Experience ... seems to teach us, that it is possible for moral and physical causes to counteract the effects that might at first be expected from an increase of the preventive check; but allowing all the weight to these effects which is in any degree probable, it may be safely asserted, that the diminution of the vices arising from indigence, would fully counterbalance them; and that all the advantages of diminished mortality, and superior comforts, which would certainly result from an increase of the preventive check, may be placed entirely on the side of the gains to the cause of happiness and virtue' (572). And similarly in a reply (introduced in 1806) to Arthur Young's criticism that Malthus had assumed 'perfect chastity in the single state':12 'Perfect virtue is indeed absolutely necessary to enable men to avoid all the moral and physical evils which depend upon his own conduct; but who ever expected perfect virtue upon earth? I have said what I conceive to be strictly true, that it is our duty to defer marriage till we can feed our children, and that it is also our duty not to indulge ourselves in vicious gratifications; but I have never said that I expected either, much less both, of these duties to be completely fulfilled ... Whatever I may have said in drawing a picture professedly visionary, for the sake of illustration, in the practical application of my principles I have taken man as he is, with all his imperfections on his head. And thus viewing him, and knowing that some

12 'On the application of the principles of population, to the question of assigning land to cottagers,' Annals of Agriculture 41/239 (1804), 208-31.

890 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

checks to population must exist, I have not the slightest hesitation in saying, that the prudential check to marriage is better than premature mortality. And in this decision I feel myself completely justified by experience' (1806, II, 537—8). That the emphasis, in practice, is on 'prudence' not 'moral restraint' emerges also in the Encyclopaedia Britannica article 'Population': The delay of marriage, owing to the difficulty of providing for a family, when the degree of irregularity to which it may lead cannot be ascertained, may be usefully called the prudential restraint on marriage and population. And this will be found to be the chief mode in which the preventive check practically operates' (i824b/i986,4, 204). Malthus was on the defensive against critics who believed he considered vice or misery to be unavoidable. But this criticism was justified precisely because moral restraint, in Malthus's view, could not be much relied upon.13 VI PROLOGUE TO THE THEORY OF ECONOMIC POLICY: THE PRINCIPLES

The foregoing discussion has turned on various implications for social policy to be found in the Essay on Population. In this section I bring attention to broader generalizations regarding the role of government appearing in the Principles. A central theme of the methodological Introduction is that failure to formalize the exceptions to 'general rules' might undermine the reputation of economic theory. This is illustrated (in 1820) by the general rule of governmental non-interference: 'It is, for instance, one of the general rules in political economy, that governments should not interfere in the direction of capital and industry, but leave every person, so long as he obeys the laws of justice, to pursue his own interest in his own way, as the best security for the constant and equable supply of the national wants. Though to this rule they allow that exceptions may possibly occur; yet thinking that the danger from the officious meddling of governments is so much greater than any which could arise from the neglect of such exceptions, they would be inclined to make the rule universal. In this, however, I cannot agree. Though I should most readily allow that altogether more evil is likely to arise from governing too much, than from a tendency to the other extreme; yet, still, if the consequences of not attending to these exceptions were of sufficient magnitude and frequency to be conspicuous to the public, I should be decidedly of opinion, that the cause of general principles was much more likely to lose than to gain by concealment' (1820, 13-14). The illustration from the case of non-interference of the need to admit

13 Allowing 'promiscuity' as an alternative to the misery and vice of poverty is inconsistent with a global rejection of mechanical contraception. This matter is taken up in chapter 19, PP- 935, 944-5-

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 891

exceptions to general rules, is removed from the second edition. But another passage with a similar message is retained and too much should not be made of the omission: 'It is obviously ... impossible for a government strictly to let things take their natural course; and to recommend such a line of conduct, without limitations and exceptions, could not fail to bring disgrace upon general principles, as totally inapplicable to practice' (1820, 20; 1836, 16). Moreover, the position 'that altogether more evil is likely to arise from governing too much, than from a tendency to the other extreme' is implicit in a passage common to both versions on the necessity for 'science' and 'professional knowledge' in approaching the problem of legitimate intervention: 'It may, however, safely be asserted, that a propensity to govern too much is a certain indication of ignorance and rashness. The ablest physicians are the most sparing in the use of medicine, and the most inclined to trust to the healing power of nature. The statesman, in like manner, who knows the most of his business, will be the most unwilling to interrupt the natural direction of industry and capital. But both are occasionally called upon to interfere, and the more science they respectively possess, the more judiciously will they do it; nor will the acknowledged propriety of interfering but little supersede, in any degree, the use of the most extensive professional knowledge in both cases' (1820, 20-1; 1836, 16). There was, then, apparently no change in the presumption against excessive interference, though not against interference as such. Malthus leaves the specifics of his own position open, which is to be expected in the context, concerning himself rather with generalizations relating to some characteristic difficulties facing policy makers. While there was a 'universally acknowledged' role for the state - perhaps Malthus had in mind Smith's famous generalizations - 'and though the line appears to be drawn with tolerable precision, when it is considered generally ... when we come to particulars, doubts may arise, and certainly in many instances have arisen, as to the subjects to be included in this classification. To what extent education and the support of the poor should be public concerns? What share the Government should take in the construction and maintenance of roads, canals, public docks? What course it should adopt with regard to colonization and emigration, and in the support of forts and establishments in foreign countries? On all these questions, and many others, there may be differences of opinion; and on all these questions the sovereign and his ministers are called upon to decide' (1820, 18-19; 1836, 14-15). The practical difficulties of judgment were compounded when it came to the repeal of existing legislation 'formed at a period comparatively unenlightened': 'But to see fully the amount of partial evil arising from present change, and the extent of general good to be effected by it, so as to warrant active interference, requires no inconsiderable share of knowledge and judgement' (1820, 19) - this is absent from the 1836 version;

892 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

'while to remain inactive under such circumstances, can only be justified by a conviction, founded on the best grounds, that in any specific change contemplated, taken in all its consequences, the balance of evil will preponderate' - a utilitarian conception (1820, 19; 1836, 15). The deletion from the second edition of the requirement for caution before proceeding to reform is probably of little significance, although that version continues with a further passage that focuses on a different sort of caution: To proceed straight forward in the rigid application of general principles without any reference to the difficulties created by the existing laws of the country, and its actual situation and circumstances, might plunge it into such complicated distress, as not only to excite the public indignation against the authors of such measures, but to bring permanent discredit upon the principles which had prompted them.'14 Malthus closed by pointing to the necessity of taxation which also rendered 'letting things alone' academic. The problem was to assure 'the least possible prejudice to the prosperity of the state, and the happiness of individuals' (1820, 19; 1836, 15). And here sound theory was essential. VII

LABOUR POLICY AND SOCIAL CONTROL

For a more specific picture Malthus's actual position on the role of government, we return to the Essay.15 As we noted earlier, though some allowance was made for agricultural subsidies in 1798, this sort of intervention is scarcely conspicuous (above, p. 884). The impression that Malthus played down the potential of direct intervention with an eye to agricultural expansion — though he did not absolutely exclude it — is further confirmed by an addition of 1806: 'To restore our independence, and build our national greatness and commercial prosperity on the sure foundation of agriculture, it is evidently not sufficient, to propose premiums for tillage, to cultivate this or that waste, or even to pass a general inclosure bill, though these are all excellent as far as they go' (1806, II, 270-1 ).16 The general perspective in this regard is nicely summarized in the following statement of 1803, which is carried over to all later editions: 'It is not probable that any country with a large territory should ever be completely cultivated: and I am inclined to think that we often draw very inconsiderate conclusions against the industry and government of states from the appearance of uncultivated lands in them. It seems to be the clear and express

14 This is illustrated from the national debt: 'Measures calculated to terminate in a rise in the value of money might be little felt in a country without a national debt; but with a large money amount to be paid annually to public creditors, they might occasion a distribution of property most unfavourable to production.' 15 For the rejection of social control over the savings rate both in advanced and underdeveloped economies, see chapter 12, p. 615. 16 The text proceeds to champion an appropriate system of Corn Laws.

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 893

duty of every government to remove all obstacles and give every facility to the enclosure and cultivation of land; but when this has been done, the rest must be left to the operation of individual interest; and upon this principle it cannot be expected that any new land should be brought into cultivation, the manure and the labour necessary for which might be employed to greater advantage on the improvement of land already in cultivation; and this is a case which will very frequently occur' (1803/1986, 5,458). In 1803 and the later editions of the Essay, as in 1798, the emphasis is on private property, the marriage institution, and self-interest generally as providing the key to progress with an eye to working-class standards: 'That the principal and most permanent cause of poverty, has little or no [1806: direct] relation to forms of government, or the unequal division of property,' followed 'from the principle of population' (574; 1806, II, 498). But again there is also the insistence that this should not be read as a case against the feasibility of improvement and reform, including a more equable income distribution, albeit within a class-structured society - that 'gradual and progressive improvement in human society, which, before the late wild speculations on the subject, was the object of rational expectation' (575) • The principle of population was not to be treated as a barrier to 'improvement': 'The structure of society, in its great features, will probably always remain unchanged. We have every reason to believe, that it will always consist of a class of proprietors and a class of labourers; but the condition of each, and the proportion which they bear to each other, may be so altered, as greatly to improve the harmony and beauty of the whole. It would indeed be a melancholy reflection that, while the views of physical science are daily enlarging, so as scarcely to be bounded by the most distant horizon, the science of moral and political philosophy should be confined within such narrow limits, or at best be so feeble in its influence, as to be unable to counteract the increasing obstacles to human happiness arising from the progress of population. But however formidable these obstacles may have appeared in some parts of this work, it is hoped that the general result of the inquiry is such, as not to make us give up the cause of the improvement of human society in despair. The partial good which seems to be attainable is worthy of all our exertions; is sufficient to direct our efforts, and animate our prospects' (575-6). A word is required here on Malthus's political perspective. Repeatedly he states his fear that, if workers are unaware of the root cause of poverty and have unrealistic expectations awakened as to what can be done for them by society, their disappointment would be such as to explode in anarchic violence, only to be crushed by despotic governments supported even by those who would be sympathetic to reform: The pressure of distress on the lower classes of people, with the habit of attributing this distress to their rulers, appears to me to be the rock of defence, the castle, the guardian spirit of despotism. It affords to the tyrant that fatal and

894 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

unanswerable plea of necessity ... While any dissatisfied man of talents has power to persuade the lower classes of people, that all their poverty and distress arise solely from the iniquity of the government... it is evident that the seeds of fresh discontents and fresh revolutions are continually sowing ... Are we to be surprised, that, under such circumstances, the majority of well disposed people, finding that a government, with proper restrictions was unable to support itself against the revolutionary spirit, and weary and exhausted with perpetual change, to which they could see no end, should give up the struggle in despair, and throw themselves into the arms of the first power which can afford them protection against the horrors of anarchy' (500-1). In short, the 'habit of expecting too much, and the irritation occasioned by disappointments, continually give a wrong direction to ... efforts in favour of liberty, and constantly tend to defeat the accomplishments of those gradual reforms in government, and that slow melioration of the condition of the lower classes of society, which are really attainable' (1806, II, 390-1). The failure to appreciate the root cause of poverty merely 'paralyzed the exertions of the best friends of liberty; and those salutary reforms which are acknowledged to be necessary in order to repair the breaches of time, and improve the fabric of our constitution, are thus rendered much more difficult, and consequently much less probable' (i8i7,III, 173)-17 As for appropriate steps, while there was little a government could do assuming 'an unrestricted increase of population' — a fundamental qualification, as we shall see - 'yet its influence is great in giving the best direction to those checks which in some form or other must necessarily take place' (1806, II, 388-9). A new allowance for 'the effect of good government in diminishing poverty' is spelled out in the Advertisement to the 1806 edition (I, vi). The allusion is in part to the strengthening of prudential habits by assuring 'perfect security of property,' but also to extension of the franchise: 'If ... the representative system, by securing to the lower classes of society a more equal and liberal mode of treatment from their superiors, gives to each individual a greater personal respectability, and a greater fear of personal degradation, it is evident that it will powerfully cooperate with the security of property in animating the exertions of industry, and in generating habits of prudence, and thus more powerfully tend to increase the riches and prosperity of the lower classes of the community, than if the same laws had existed under a despotism' (II, 390). The point here is that the contribution by labourers to legislation would raise their self-esteem, with widespread effects of a desirable kind.

17 Winch, 1987, 51, observes that 'Malthus's diagnosis of the way in which popular discontent, mob violence and despotism were connected draws on contemporary events and on classical commonplaces supplemented by Hume's ideas on the possible euthanasia ... of the British Constitution in absolute monarchy.'

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 895

An important role is allowed for government in education; Malthus rejected out of hand the objection 'to a system of national education in England ... that the common people would be put in a capacity to read such works as those of Paine' (1803/1986, 3, 527; see also iSoyb/igSG, 4, 17). That the social return to educational investment exceeds the private return is a central feature of the position introduced in 1803: 'Much might be expected from a better and more general system of education. Everything that can be done in this way has indeed a very peculiar value; because education is one of those advantages, which not only all may share without interfering with each other, but the raising of one person may actually contribute to the raising of others. If, for instance, a man by education acquires that decent kind of pride, and those juster habits of thinking, which will prevent him from burdening society with a family of children which he cannot support, his conduct, as far as an individual instance can go, tends evidently to improve the condition of his fellow labourers; and a contrary conduct from ignorance, would tend as evidently to depress it' (562-3). The best hopes, Malthus concluded, was an educational scheme such as that proposed by Adam Smith - in part statefinanced - but including in the curriculum 'the frequent explanation of the real state of the lower classes of society, as affected by the principle of population, and their consequent dependence on themselves, for the chief part of their happiness, or misery' (525). T cannot help looking forward to a very decided improvement in the habits and temper of the lower classes, when their real situation has been clearly explained to them' (1806, II, 549)In the absence of an appropriate educational program, other desirable schemes designed to reduce the mortality rate must inevitably fail. But those schemes, when thus accompanied, could be justified by the principle of population correctly understood: 'It may be said, however, that any plan of generally improving the cottages of the poor, or of enabling more of them to keep cows, would evidently give them the power of rearing a greater number of children, and, by thus encouraging population, violate the principles which I have endeavoured to establish. But if I have been successful in making the reader comprehend the principal bent of this work, he will be aware that the precise reason why I think that more children ought not to be born than the country can support is, that the greatest possible number of those that are born may be supported. We cannot, in the nature of things, assist the poor, in any way, without enabling them to rear up to manhood a greater number of their children' (565). The dilemma is resolved if 'we can impress these children with the idea, that, to possess the same advantages as their parents, they must defer marriage till they have a fair prospect of being able to maintain a family. And it must be candidly confessed that, if we cannot do this, all our former efforts will have been thrown away ... [A] diminution of mortality at present will be balanced by an increased mortality in future; and the

896 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

improvement of their condition in one place will proportionally depress it in another' (565-6). It is implied in various formulations that the educational program is likely to be most effective when the rising generation has had some experience of comfort: 'No experiment respecting a provision for the poor can be said to be complete till succeeding generations have arisen,' appropriately governed by prudential motives (1806, II, 540). The best-known of Malthus's proposals relates, of course, to the abolition of the contemporary poor-relief system; these, more than anything, have stamped him with illiberality towards labour.18 Thus in 1803 he denied - against Thomas Paine (1791) - a right to subsistence: 'A man who is born into a world already possessed, if he cannot get subsistence from his parents on whom he has a just demand, and if the society do not want his labour, has no claim of right to the smallest portion of food, and, in fact, has no business to be where he is. At nature's mighty feast here is no vacant cover for him. She tells him to be gone, and will quickly execute her own orders, if he do not work upon the compassion of some of her guests' (697). In later editions this graphic formulation is absent, but the substantive point, as repeated elsewhere, always against Paine, remains: 'No person has any claim of right on society for subsistence, if his labour will not [1806: fairly] purchase it ...' (505; 1806, II, 382). Malthus's position in its essence is that the guarantee of 'indiscriminate charity' worsened the very problem it was designed to solve: 'It may be distinctly stated to be an absolute impossibility that all the different classes of society should be both well paid and fully employed, if the supply of labour on the whole exceed the demand; and as the poor-laws tend in the most marked manner to make the supply of labour exceed the demand for it, their effect must be, either to lower universally all wages, or, if some are kept up artificially, to throw great numbers of workmen out of employment, and thus constantly to increase the poverty and distress of the labouring classes of society' (1817, II, 371). Similarly, 'the sole reason why I say the poor have no claim of right to support is the physical impossibility of relieving this progressive population' (1806, II, 531). Indeed, were it not for the artificial generation of an infinite demand for labour, the problem of poverty would involve solely the current poor and he would have no objections: 'If all could be completely relieved, and poverty banished from the country, even at the expense of three-fourths of the fortunes of the rich, I would be the last to say a single syllable against relieving all,

18 An early summary of Malthus's objections to the Poor Laws is given in the first essay, Chapter V: Wage supplements merely drive up the prices of (agricultural) wage goods, held to be in relatively inelastic supply, to the cost of independent labourers; they tend to increase population 'in some measure [creating] the poor which they maintain'; they encourage irresponsibility and idleness; and they reduce labour mobility (1798/1986, /, 29-38). See also 'Plan of the gradual abolition of the poor laws proposed' (1803/1986, 3, 514-23)-

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 897

and making the degree of distress alone the measure of our bounty' (1803/1986, 5, 535; see also iSoyb/igSG, 4, 9). The problem, as formulated in an objection to Robert Owen's communal scheme (1816) was, therefore: 'How to provide for those who are in want, in such a manner as to prevent a continual increase of their numbers, and of the proportion which they bear to the whole society' (1817, III, 258; see also II, 274-86). Here we have a nice application of the 'greatest happiness' rule, a rule - Malthus implies - that makes little sense, allowing for open-ended population increase irrespective of per capita income and distribution. The characteristic Malthusian dilemma19 appears also in the discussion of other policy measures. Even self-financed pension, health, and unemployment-insurance schemes (as distinct from state poor-relief), though desirable, would fail if contributions were based on a specific family size of, say, two children with open-ended benefits: 'Such a mode of distribution implies a power of supporting a rapidly increasing and unlimited population on a limited territory, and must therefore terminate in aggravated poverty,' for no conceivable scheme 'can possibly place the labouring classes of society in such a state as to enable them to marry generally at the same age in an old and fully peopled country as they may do with perfect safety and advantage in a new one' (271—2). Similarly, improvement of cottages were desirable, provided the program was intelligently designed to avoid exacerbating population pressure: 'I cannot help thinking also, that something might be done towards bettering 19 In some respect the 'dilemma' was more apparent than real, at least in the absence of Whitbread's proposed extensions (see below, p. 900). For Malthus in fact conceded early on that the mechanics of the outdoor-relief system counteracted 'their first obvious tendency to increase population ... I have little doubt that it is almost exclusively owing to these counteracting causes, that we have been able to persevere in this system so long, and that the condition of the poor has not been so much injured by it as might have been expected' (1803/1986, 3, 563n). See also the allowance in 1806: 'The obvious tendency of the poor laws is certainly to encourage marriage, but a closer attention to all their indirect as well as direct effects, may make it a matter of doubt to what extent they really do this. They clearly tend, in their general operation, to discourage sobriety and economy, to encourage idleness and the desertion of children, and to put virtue and vice more on a level than they otherwise would be; but I will not presume to say positively that they tend to encourage population' (1806, II, 547). To this he appended in 1807: 'The most favourable light, in which the poor laws can possibly be placed, is to say, that under all the circumstances, with which they have been accompanied, they do not [much] encourage marriage; and undoubtedly the returns of the Population Act seem to warrant the assertion. Should this be true, some of the objections which have been urged in the Essay against the poor laws will of course be removed; but I wish to press on the attention of the reader, that they will in that case be removed in strict conformity to the general principles of the work, and in a manner to confirm, rather than to invalidate, the main position which it has attempted to establish' ('much' added in 1817). These qualifications have implications for modern statistical testing of Malthus's position on the demographic impact of the old Poor Law (cf. Blaug, 1963; Huzel, 1969, 1980).

898 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

the situation of the poor by a general improvement of their cottages, if care were taken, at the same time, not to make them so large as to allow of two families settling in them; and not to increase their number faster than the demand for labour required. Perhaps one of the most salutary and least pernicious checks to the frequency of early marriages in this country is the difficulty of procuring a cottage, and the laudable habits which prompt a labourer rather to defer his marriage some years in the expectation of a vacancy, than to content himself with a wretched mud cabin, like those in Ireland' (1803/1986, 3, 563). Land and cow grants were approached in the same manner: 'Even the cow system, upon a more confined plan, might not be open to objection. With any view of making it a substitute for the poor laws, and of giving labourers a right to demand land and cows in proportion to their families; or of taking the common people from the consumption of wheat, and feeding them on milk and potatoes; it appears to me, I confess, truly preposterous: but if it were so ordered as merely to provide a comfortable situation for the better and more industrious class of labourers, and to supply at the same time a very important want among the poor in general, that of milk for their children, I think that it would be extremely beneficial, and might be made a very powerful incitement to habits of industry, economy, and prudence.' Mai thus's concern to achieve just the right balance is clear: 'One should undoubtedly be extremely unwilling not to make as much use as possible of that known stimulus to industry and economy, the desire of, and attachment to, property: but it should be recollected that the good effects of this stimulus show themselves principally when this property is to be procured or preserved by personal exertions; and that they are by no means so general under other circumstances. If any idle man with a family could demand and obtain a cow and some land, I should expect to see both very often neglected' (564). The need to assure against transitional hardship is reflected in Mai thus's concern with the mechanics of Poor Law abolition: 'According to this plan all that are already married, and even all that are engaged to marry during the course of the year, and all their children would be relieved as usual; and only those who marry subsequently, and who of course may be supposed to have made better provision for contingencies would be out of the pale of relief (1806, II, 530). None the less, the point remains that once abolition of poor relief had been achieved, private charity would have to take responsibility for relief cases. As for illegitimate children, the state had a responsibility to punish parents for desertion or intentional ill-treatment, but was not responsible for the abandoned children themselves: 'The infant is, comparatively speaking, of no value to the society, as others will immediately supply its place. Its principal value is on account of its being the object of one of the most delightful passions in human nature parental affection. But if this value be disregarded, by those who are alone in a capacity to feel it, the society cannot be called upon to put itself in

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 899

their place ...' (1803/1986, 3, 517). Again, it is private charity that would have to be relied upon. But in all this it must not be forgotten that, under the going system of parish adoption, the infantile death rate was atrocious. Moreover, Malthus believed both that fathers would behave more responsibly under his proposal (518), and that private charity could be relied upon: 'If this system were pursued, we need be under no apprehensions whatever, that the number of persons in extreme want would be beyond the power and the will of the benevolent to supply. The sphere for the exercise of private charity would, I am confident, be less than it is at present; and the only difficulty would be, to restrain the hand of benevolence from assisting those in distress in so liberal a manner as to encourage indolence and want of foresight in others' (517). These pronouncements all relate to individual cases of poverty resulting from irresponsible marriages. What of cyclical unemployment? Government, we are told in 1806, had 'but little power in 'the direct and immediate relief of poverty' (1806, II, 388), and he later advised, in alluding to the distress of 1817, that workers be encouraged 'to bear an unavoidable pressure with patience' (1817, III, 172). None the less, the problem of short-run unemployment greatly troubled him. And he introduced as early as 1803 a major qualification - based on a temporal utility calculus — that removes any hint of the irresponsible application of the population principle to immediate questions of policy: The general principles on these subjects ought not to be pushed too far, though they should always be kept in view; ... and many cases may occur, in which the good resulting from the relief of the present distress, may more than overbalance the evil to be apprehended from the remote consequence. All relief in instances of distress, not arising from idle and improvident habits, clearly comes under this description; and in general it may be observed, that it is only that kind of systematic and certain relief, on which the poor can confidently depend, whatever may be their conduct, that violates general principles, in such a manner, as to make it clear that the general consequence is worse than the particular evil' (1803/1986, 5, 562). The principle of population provided guidelines only, not a pretext for extreme laissez-faire. Also relevant is a sort of 'Benthamite' calculation involving the differential weighing of consequences according to propinquity and relative certainty. The fact that various alternatives to poor relief, such as land-renting schemes, might fail ultimately, even if temporarily successful - unless accompanied by appropriate educational measure designed to affect the new generation - 'should by no means deter us from making such experiments, when present good is to be obtained by them, and a future overbalance of evil not justly to be apprehended. It should only make us less rash in drawing our inferences' (1806, II, 541). Malthus added the further point in 1806 that, if the decision were made to retain a system of Poor Laws, knowledge of the principle of population might allow the removal of the worst disadvantages (552). Here we have a

900 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

further hint regarding his probable attitude to the kind of system introduced in i834.20 A main concern, of course, was that the guarantee of wage supplements - the current 'Speenhamland' system often gave further grants per child, at least after the first two - would encourage young men to marry earlier than they would otherwise do, thus countering the encouragement of prudence, or delay of marriage, till, with the savings made in the interval, a couple could support the smaller number of children that could then be expected. The consequence of such excessive population growth would be to depress the market wage - in fact, farmers preferred to pay lower than market wages, knowing that the difference would be made up from the rates paid partly by others than themselves (Letter to Samuel Whitbread, iSoyb/igSG, 4, 10, 16). The problem would be exacerbated, Malthus feared, by implementation of Whitbread's amendments, which would extend the burden of the rates to all property and also empower parishes to build cottages for the poor (10-11, 13). None the less, Malthus clarified that, if the 'tendency' to depress the 'independent labourer' could be avoided, he would not oppose a system of poor relief; he proposed rather its 'confinement' to assure a balance of advantage: 'To make the advantages of a system of poor laws counterbalance its disadvantages, it seems to be necessary that they should be so confined in their operation, as not to depress the wages of labour below what is sufficient for the support of the average number of children that might be expected from each marriage. If they extended no further than this, every man in marrying might have a fair and rational hope, that by industry and good conduct, he might be able to continue independent; and if this hope failed merely through the largeness of his family, he would not be much degraded either in his own eyes or those of his fellow labourers' (i5).21 The focus upon the proportion which those in want 'bear to the whole society' (above, p. 897) is particularly significant in this context. Although Mai thus's initial concerns were awakened by reports of rapid increases in

20 Grampp questions whether Mai thus's actual effect on that legislation was as great as is usually supposed (1974, 202-3). 21 Even in 1798 Malthus recognized the need for indoor relief in extreme cases, and implied support for the principle of 'lesser eligibility' incorporated later in the 1834 legislation (1798/1986, /, 37). His further allowances (above, note 19) similarly suggest a balanced position. See also Malthus, l824b/ig86, 4, 238: 'To what extent assistance may be given even by law to the poorer classes of society when in distress, without defeating the great object of the law of property ... depends mainly upon the feelings and habits of the labouring classes of society, and can only be determined by experience. If it be generally considered as so discreditable to receive parochial relief, that great exertions are made to avoid it, and few or none marry with a certain prospect of being obliged to have recourse to it, there is no doubt that those who were really in distress might be adequately assisted, with little danger of a constantly increasing proportion of paupers; and in that case a great good would be attained without any proportionate evil to counter-balance it.'

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 901

the poor rates and the prospect of an extraordinary proportion of paupers in the society' (1803/1986, 3, 514), he none the less insisted on a careful weighing of the pros and cons of poor relief, provided that an increase in the proportion in question could be avoided: If we could be secure, that, though the number of the dependent poor might increase with the increasing population, yet that their proportion to it would remain the same; and if this proportion were not so great as very materially to affect the whole body, the question would at once assume a different form. It would still be true however that the poor laws even in such a state would have a tendency to depress the independent labourer, to weaken in some degree the springs of industry and good conduct, and to put virtue and vice more on a level than they would be in the natural course of things; but as in all human institutions it is impossible to avoid some disadvantages, it might fairly be urged that the certain relief of the aged and the helpless, of those who had met with misfortunes which no common prudence could have avoided, and of those who had a greater number of children than they could be expected to foresee, would more than counterbalance those inconveniences, and that the good would preponderate over the evil. (iSoyb/igSS, 4, 14-15)

Along these balanced lines Mai thus added in 1806 an important qualification to an earlier case for non-intervention in the event of a poor harvest, specifically alluding in his Advertisement to the addition of an observation 'on the policy as well as duty of assisting the poor through temporary seasons of distress' (1806,1, v-vi) — 'policy' alluding to the need to cushion workers from temporary adverse pressures in order to avoid inappropriate population effects: 'We must not forget that both humanity and true policy imperiously require, that we should give every assistance to the poor on these occasions that the nature of the case will admit. If provisions were to continue at the price of scarcity, the wages of labour must necessarily rise, or sickness and famine would quickly diminish the number of labourers, and the supply of labour being unequal to the demand, its price would soon rise in a still greater proportion than the price of provisions. But even one or two years of scarcity, if the poor were left entirely to shift for themselves, might produce some effect of this kind, and consequently it is our interest as well as our duty to give them temporary aid in such seasons of distress. It is on such occasions that every cheap substitute for bread, and every mode of economizing food should be resorted to. Nor should we be too ready to complain of that high price of corn which by encouraging importation increases the supply' (II, 169-70). These statements are to be taken seriously. Thus Malthus allowed public works as an appropriate step in some cases of short-term unemployment (e.g., letter to Ricardo, 11 January 1817 [above, pp. 624-5]). But there was always a danger that, where a problem of secular excess labour supply existed, public works might complicate the long-term solution. The severe

902 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

dilemma is well expressed thus: 'It is probable that the poor might be employed more than they have hitherto been, in away to be advantageous to their habits and morals, without being prejudicial in other respects ... [But in] no conceivable case can the forced employment of the poor, though managed in the most judicious manner, have any direct tendency to proportion more accurately the supply of labour to the natural demand for it. And without great care and caution it is obvious that it may have a pernicious effect of an opposite kind. When, for instance, from deficient demand or deficient capital, labour has a strong tendency to fall, if we keep it up to its usual price by creating an artificial demand by public subscriptions or advances from the government, we evidently prevent the population of the country from adjusting itself gradually to its diminished resources, and act much in the same manner as those, who would prevent the price of corn from rising in a scarcity, which must necessarily terminate in increased distress' (1817, III, 273-4) .22 As mentioned, this was not a global rejection of public works, only an appeal for caution and awareness of all possible outcomes: 'Without then meaning to object to all plans for employing the poor, some of which, at certain times and with proper restrictions, may be useful as temporary measures, it is of great importance, in order to prevent ineffectual efforts and continued disappointments, to be fully aware that the permanent remedy which we are seeking cannot possibly come from this quarter.' Were the public-works scheme 'such as to co-operate with the lessons of Nature and Providence, and to encourage and promote habits of prudence and foresight, essential and permanent benefit may be expected from it: if it has no tendency of this kind, it may possibly still be good as a temporary measure, and on other accounts, but we may be quite certain that it does not apply to the source of the specific evil for which we are seeking a remedy' (275). A further solution to (short-term) unemployment, where excess labour supply reflects a lagging population response to a preceding stimulus that has proven temporary, was seen to lie in emigration, although again 'with any view of making room for an unrestricted increase of population, emigration is perfectly inadequate' (1803/1986, 3, 353). It was 'the duty and interest of governments to facilitate emigration,' though they could not legitimately oblige it' (1806, II, 535n). And Malthus observed in 1817 with the postwar depression in mind: 'If, for instance, from a combination of external and internal causes, a very great stimulus should be given to the population of a country for ten or twelve years together, and it should 22 The possible 'pernicious' effect is focused on in evidence given to the Select Committee on Emigration (5 May 1827). Here Malthus maintained that public works 'relieves [labour] for a short time, but leaves them afterwards in a condition worse than before'; this was so because ' [it] has a tendency to induce them to marry earlier, and it enables them at first to support their children; but when the work ceases, they are left in a more destitute condition than before' (House of Commons, 1827, 321 )•

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 903

then comparatively cease, it is clear that labour will continue flowing into the market, with almost undiminished rapidity, while the means of employing and paying it have been essentially contracted. It is precisely under these circumstances that emigration is most useful as a temporary relief; and it is in these circumstances that Great Britain finds herself placed at present ... The only real relief in such a case [as in 1816 and 1817] is emigration; and the subject at the present moment is well worthy the attention of the government, both as a matter of humanity and policy' (1817, II, 305). Early in 1827 - the revival from the commercial crisis of 1826 would not yet have been under way - he wrote to Wilmot-Horton: 'My general opinions on the subject of Emigration are well known and I certainly think that the present is one of the occasions in which Government might advantageously give every facility for the purpose; but I have not attended to the details, in regard to the best practical means of affecting the object ...' (7 January 1827).23 Assuring permanent benefit required, of course, that any 'void' created by emigration should not be entirely filled up. Writing again to Wilmot Horton regarding the latter's scheme entailing government-aided emigration (Horton, 1830) he expressed this concern, while none the less indicating his support: 'Could you indeed accomplish it, in an entirely unobjectionable manner, you would in my opinion be the greatest benefactor to the human race that has yet appeared. It would be securing at once, and permanently, good wages to all who were able and willing to work, allowing still for a continual increase of population. But though it would be a contradiction to all theory and all past experience to deny the strong tendency of population to recover lost numbers, and the extreme difficulty of keeping the labouring classes from increasing beyond the effectual demand for labour, yet I think that both policy and humanity require that we make every practical effort to improve their condition; and I feel no doubt that your plan of emigration would essentially contribute to this most desirable end, by affording undoubted present relief, and the best chance which offers itself of the means of permanent improvement' (9 June 1830). I do not see from this correspondence that Malthus 'was no great enthusiast for emigration' (James, 1979, 396; also O Grada, 1984, 87). On the contrary. And on 22 February he confirmed that, whatever the long-run prospects for adequate population control,' [at] all events there is the immediate temporary relief, which is a consideration not to be put out of the question.' 23 This letter and the others quoted below are the property of Derbyshire County Council and are held in the council's Record Office, Matlock (DRO 03155). They are not printed in Ghosh, 1963. Wilmot-Horton's plan entailed government loans to parishes or individuals. Malthus warned of problems regarding finance: 'I do not object to your mode of providing for the expense, though the little I have is in the funds; but I fear that in the present temper of Parliament and the country, if any surplus revenue can be dispensed with, the clamour will be for relief from taxation' (22 February 1830).

904 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

One can best appreciate Malthus's position by supposing the general practice of prudential restraint - a situation in which 'low' family size (which incidentally Malthus thought of as about six children) is the rule. With the removal of population pressure, the practical approach to policy is transformed. Public works, emigration, insurance schemes now come fully into their own. But, most striking of all, a case could even be made for family allowances to help those who had more children than they could be expected to foresee — a position first formulated in 1803. As for the initial framework assumed: 'If the lowest classes of society were ... diminished, and the middle classes increased, each labourer might indulge a more rational hope of rising by diligence and exertion into a better station; the rewards of industry and virtue would be increased in number; human society would appear to consist of fewer blanks and more prizes; and the sum of social happiness would be evidently augmented. To indulge, however, in any distant views of this kind, unaccompanied by the evils usually attendant on a stationary or decreasing demand for labour, we must suppose the general prevalence of such prudential habits among the poor, as would prevent them from marrying, when the actual price of labour, joined to what they might have saved in their single state, would not give them the prospect of being able to support a wife and six children without assistance. And in every point of view, such a degree of prudential restraint [would be extremely beneficial; and]24 would produce a very striking amelioration in the condition of the lower classes of people' (1803/1986, 5, 567-8). Malthus allowed 'that even this degree of prudence might not always avail, as when a man marries he cannot tell what number of children he shall have, and many have more than six,' but did 'not think that any evil would result from making a certain allowance to every child above this number; not with a view of rewarding a man for his large family, but merely of relieving him from a species of distress which it would be unreasonable in us to expect that he should calculate upon. And with this view, the relief should be merely such as to place him exactly in the same situation as if he had six children. Montesquieu disapproves of an edict of Louis XIV, which gave certain pensions to those who had ten and twelve children, as being of no use in encouraging population. For the very reason that he disapproves of it, I should think that some law of the kind might be adopted without danger, and might relieve particular individuals from a very pressing and unlooked for distress, without operating in any respect as an encouragement to marriage' (568) .25 Malthus's reformist perspective shines through in late correspondence.

24 The 1986 version neglects to provide the bracketed phrase. It was deleted from the 1807 version (1807, II, 410). 25 One might think that this passage refers to a permanent stationary state; but the notion of an average family size of six children is then remarkable.

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 905

Supposing an initial state of stationariness, agricultural improvement (or the relaxation of corn-import restrictions) will lead to higher wages, which would prove unmaintainable - unless, of course, accompanied by an improved degree of prudential restraint. Yet even in its absence he made a case for the temporary improvement: 'It does not by any means follow from these principles, that we should not use our utmost endeavours to make two ears of wheat grow where one grew before, or to improve our commercial code by freeing it from restraints. An increase of population is in itself a decided advantage, if it be not accompanied by an increased proportion of vice and misery. And the period during which the pressure of population is lightened, though it may not be of long duration, is a period of comparative ease, and ought by no means to be thrown out of our consideration' (31 March 1829; in Senior, 1829, 85).26 In this respect the reformist orientation is more striking even than that of J.S. Mill, who later argued that, unless the effect of tariff reform or technological change could be rendered of permanent advantage to labour, there was little point to them. In fact, Mai thus believed 'that the experience of such a period may sometimes operate in giving to the labouring-classes a taste for such a mode of living as will tend to increase their prudential habits' as was required to render the improvement permanent (in Senior, 85-6). In the light of all this, he was asking for trouble by referring as late as 1830 (as in 1798) to prospects for ample wages at full employment as a rare phenomenon (i824b/i986, 4, 201; republished in 1830). This position, it must again be emphasized, held good, not as a universal prediction, but subject to the presumption of an unchecked growth rate of population (202) precisely the situation his proposals sought to avoid.

Mai thus's championship of 'high' wages and a low mortality rate needs no further amplification.27 But the evidence of his 'reformist' status should

26 See above, p. 854. See also his concern in the Essay on Population with the short-run benefits, above, p. 899- Other examples are found in chapter 17, p. 826. Similarly, in the Principles we find a concern with cyclical fluctuations from this perspective: 'Theoretical writers are apt, in their calculations, to overlook these intervals; but eight or ten years, recurring not infrequently, are serious spaces in human life. They amount to a serious sum of happiness or misery, according as they are prosperous or adverse, and leave the country in a very different state at their termination. In prosperous times the mercantile classes often realize fortunes, which go far towards securing them against the future; but unfortunately the working classes, though they share in the general prosperity, do not share [1836: in it] so largely as in the general adversity. They may suffer the greatest distress in a period of low wages, but cannot be adequately compensated by a period of high wages. To them fluctuations must always bring more evil than good' (1820, 521-2; 1836, 437). 27 It might though be added that, in the 1826 edition of his Essay, Malthus commended

906 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

be seen within a broader intellectual context. As for his position on the Constitution, we find in his Principles that he opposed the abolition of primogeniture and the consequent break-up of great estates on 'higher considerations ... than diose which relate to mere wealth' (1820, 437; 1836, 380). For the British constitution was 'mainly due to a landed aristocracy'; and 'if we think that, whatever may be its theoretical imperfections, it has practically given a better government, and more liberty to a greater mass of people for a longer time than any which history records, it would be most unwise to venture upon any such change as would risk the whole structure, and throw us upon a wide sea of experiment, where the chances are so dreadfully against our attaining the object of our search' (1820, 437-8; 1836, 380).28 The second edition, however, recognizes the extension of the franchise (presumably the 1832 Reform Act); and it is allowed that, though perhaps premature, it might turn out for the best: 'This was written in 1820. Imperious circumstances have since brought on a reform of a more sudden and extensive nature than prudence would have perhaps suggested, if the time and the circumstances could have been commanded. Yet it must be allowed, that all which has been done, is to bring the practical working of the constitution nearer to its theory. And there is every reason to believe, that a great majority of the middle classes of society, among whom the elective franchise has been principally extended, must soon see that their own interests, and the interests and happiness of those who are dependent upon them, will be most essentially injured by any proceedings which tend to encourage turbulence and shake the security of property. If they become adequately sensible of this most unquestionable truth, and act accordingly, there is no doubt that the removal of those unsightly blots, of those handles, which, with a fair show of reason, might at any time be laid hold of to excite discontents and to recent factory legislation for improving the working conditions of children in cotton mills (1986, 3, 444n). For further emphasis on Malthus's reformist orientation, see Bonar, 1924, 319-54; Penrose, 1957; Spengler, 1960 [1945]; James, 1979, 109, 369-76, 388-406, 432-3. 449f-; Petersen, 1979, 48, 218-39; Dupaquier, 1983; and Himmelfarb, 1984, 119-22. 28 On Malthus as a 'Country,' or 'old-fashioned,' or 'moderate' Whig, hostile to executive encroachments, and to excessively large standing armies, and reliant on country gentlemen to resist corruption and defend liberty, see Winch, 1983, 75-7. Winch, 1987, 48-5, provides various indexes of Malthus's Whig credentials. See also Waterman, 1991, 26: 'Though a priest of the established church, Malthus was writing [in 1798] from within a whig tradition of social theory ...' (Waterman, 196-204, provides a useful classification of contemporary idealogies.) Bonar observed that 'the details of [Malthus's] views on the State and government are those of an advanced Whig of the school of Fox and Grey. His adherence to Adam Smith did not prevent him from departing from "laissez faire" even more than his master' (1924, 208). Otter referred to Malthus as 'a firm, consistent, and decided Whig, the earnest advocate of salutary improvements and reforms, but strongly and sincerely attached to the institutions of his country, and fearful of all wanton experiment and innovations' (1836, li).

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 907

stir up the people, will place the British constitution upon a much broader and more solid base than ever' (1836, 38on). Malthus's opposition to nationalist (neo-mercantilist) arguments for a large population at low wages stands out unambiguously. That national strength required a large population he agreed, but it was 'as to the mode of obtaining a vigorous and efficient population' that he differed from others championing a large population (1806, II, 509). The military draft, moreover, would have to be filled by drawing labour from high-paying alternatives: 'We cannot obtain incompatible objects; if we possess the advantage of being able to keep nearly all our people constantly employed either in agriculture or commerce, we cannot expect to retain the opposite advantage of their being always at leisure, and willing to enlist for a very small sum. But we may rest perfectly assured, that while we have the efficient population, we shall never want men to fill our armies if we propose to them adequate motives' (581-2). There is even a suggestion that prospects for peace would be enhanced if governments had to pay well for their soldiers: 'The ambition of princes would want instruments of destruction, if the distress of the lower classes of people did not drive them under their standards. A recruiting serjeant always prays for a bad harvest and a want of employment, or, in other words, a redundant population' (1803/1986, 3, 478-9). The advantages of good earnings extend to the improvement of national defence capacity - in effect a reversal of the Smithian proposition that 'defence is more important than opulence' to read: opulence, provided labour benefits sufficiently, encourages defence; for 'where every family possessed the necessaries of life in plenty, and a decent portion of its comforts and conveniences, there could not exist that hope of change, or at best that melancholy and disheartening indifference to it, which sometimes prompts the lower classes of people to say, "Let what will come, we cannot be worse off than we are now"' (480) ,29 One also notes Malthus's complaint that, while labourers had it in their own hands to assure rising standards, the state had done its best to thwart the message: ' [The labourer] has always been told, that to raise up subjects for his king and country is a very meritorious act. He has done this act, and yet is suffering for it. He naturally thinks that he is suffering for righteousness sake; and it cannot but strike him as most extremely unjust and cruel in his king and country, to allow him thus to suffer, in return for giving them what they are continually declaring that they particularly want' (484). The education program viewed from this perspective is radical indeed. Equally striking is Malthus's deflection of the religious argument in favour of a high population which traditionally involved the encourage-

29 All of this points directly to a common view shared by Malthus, Godwin, Paine, and Cobbett, including a dislike of standing armies and of overbearing government measures against sedition (Bonar, 1924, 338).

908 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

ment of early marriages and large families (above, p. 881; see also chapter J 9> P- 944)- And his reaction to the French Revolution is also revealing, for it was by no means hostile. His recognition of the upward wage trend in France since 1789 points directly to the possibility of reform — in this case the abolition of various feudal institutions - as a means to increased personal responsibility, and indirecdy to a reduced birth rate: 'The improved condition of the labouring classes in France since the revolution has been accompanied by a greatly diminished proportion of births, which has had its natural and necessary effect in giving to these classes a greater share of the produce of the country, and has kept up the advantage arising from the sale of the church lands and other national domains, which would otherwise have been lost in a short time. The effect of the revolution in France has been, to make every person depend more upon himself and less upon others. The labouring classes are therefore become more industrious, more saving and more prudent in marriage than formerly; and it is quite certain that without these effects the revolution would have done nothing for them' (1817, II, 378-9). This passage is of the first importance since those writers to whom Mai thus was responding in 1798 had been 'infected with the enthusiasm of the French Revolution' (Fetter, 1898, 154) -30 Consistent with the reformist perspective of the foregoing passage is Malthus's critical view of 'feudal' society, which incidentally adds to the evidence that Malthus was no sycophantic apologist of the landlord class: 'The profits of stock are that source of revenue from which the middle classes are chiefly maintained; and the increase of capital, which is both the cause and effect of increasing riches, may be said to be the efficient cause of the emancipation of the great body of society from a dependence on the landlords. In a country of limited extent, consisting of fertile land divided into large properties, as long as the capital remains inconsiderable, the structure of society is most unfavourable to liberty and good government. This was exacdy the state of Europe in the feudal times. The landlords could in no way spend their incomes than by maintaining a great

30 On Malthus and the French Revolution see also Bonar, 1924, 336-7: 'It had been said that he cannot be justly described as being a reactionary; and, in truth, besides being a critic of Godwin and of Condorcet, he is influenced to some extent by the same ideas that influenced them. The Essay on Population is coloured throughout by a tacit or open reference to the Rights of Man, a watchword borrowed from France by the American Republic, to be restored again at the Revolution ... His economical antecedents and his political views bound him to the French Revolution.' Elie Halevy observed 'that Malthus's influence was first felt by the liberal section of opinion, since he only differed from the theorists of indefinite progress by adopting a more moderate interpretation of their own theory' (1955, 245). Also Spengler, 1960 [1945], 378: 'Malthus differed from Godwin and Condorcet regarding values and ends, democratic and otherwise, in terms of detail far more than in terms of generality.' Spengler's article casts much light on the matter of this section; esp. 385-7. See, too, Waterman, 1991, 26.

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 909

number of followers; and it was by the growth of capital in all the employments to which it is directed that the pernicious power of the landlords was destroyed, and their dependent followers were turned into merchants, manufacturers, tradesmen, farmers, and independent labourers; - a change of prodigious advantage to the great body of society, including the labouring classes' (1817, III, 21-2). A final word regarding Mai thus's objections to contemporary 'communist' schemes. Population growth, he believed, perhaps naively, could only be adequately controlled in a system of private property under the rule of self-interest, where each individual was 'responsible for the maintenance of his own children' and 'subjected to the natural inconveniences and difficulties arising from the indulgence of his inclinations [in too early marriage] and to no other whatever' (1817, II, 284) .31 Similarly: 'The happiness of the whole is to be the result of the happiness of individuals, and to begin first with them. No co-operation is required. Every step tells. He who performs his duty faithfully will reap the full fruits of it, whatever may be the number of others who fail. This duty is express, and intelligible to the humblest capacity. It is merely, that he is not to bring beings into the world for whom he cannot find the means of support. When once this subject is cleared from the obscurity thrown over it by parochial laws and private benevolence, every man must feel the strongest conviction of such an obligation ... It is clearly his interest, and will tend greatly to promote his happiness, to defer marrying, till by industry and economy he is in a capacity to support the children that he may reasonably expect from his marriage' (1803/1986, 5, 483). Radical institutional change would not in itself provide the answer to low standards of living, for excessive population growth would still have to be avoided: 'The misery and vice arising from the pressure of the population too hard against the limits of subsistence, and the misery and vice arising from promiscuous intercourse, may be considered as the Scylla and Charybdis of human life. That it is possible for each individual to steer clear of both these rocks is certainly true ...; but that these rocks do not form a difficulty independent of human institutions, no person with any knowledge of the subject can venture to assert' (1806, II, 553n). Malthus apparently neglects the 'free-rider' problem. Even assuming the success of an education program inculcating the principle that the wage depends on checks to the marriage rate, each self-interested individual has a motive to marry young - accepting the basic assumption of a desire for marriage and procreation - if he believes others will behave responsibly and delay marriage, thereby raising or maintaining the wage. It is not the case that the responsible individual will 'reap the full fruits' of his good behaviour 'whatever may be the number of others who fail,' since his

31 This holds apparently presuming an adequate educational program (above, p. 895).

910 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

expectations of future earnings may be ruined by irresponsible behaviour by others. (J.S. Mill was to take this problem seriously.)32 The utilitarian perspective on social organization - the evaluation of institutions only by their consequences rather then as 'good' or 'bad' per se- may be illustrated by Malthus's case against communism. He admitted that 'the greatest production of food which the powers of the earth would admit cannot possibly take place under a system of private property' (1817, III, 413; also i824b/i986, 4, 199). The key to his objections to 'systems of equality and community of goods' - he here had in mind Robert Owen (1816), not only Godwin's scheme, which, lacking a state, was essentially anarchical - is that self-interested calculations regarding age of marriage are precluded and would have to be replaced by legal restraints involving rigorous enforcement and punishment of an 'unnatural, immoral, or cruel' order (1817, II, 285). It was, in fact, his 'greatest objection to a system of equality and the system of the poor-laws (two systems which, however different in their outset, are of a nature calculated to produce the same results) ... that the society in which they are effectively carried into execution, will ultimately be reduced to the miserable alternative of choosing between universal want and the enactment of direct laws against marriage' (368-9). Poverty, in brief, was not inevitable under communism any more than under capitalism; Malthusianism was not a universalist doctrine regarding the non-improvability of mankind, as Marx maintained - and as Malthus himself suggested in the 'theological' chapters of 1798 (see chapter 19: II). But any solution in a communist society — in 1798 Malthus predicted the collapse of communist systems - would entail unacceptable constraints on personal freedom. Legal restraints might have seemed less objectionable to him if countenanced by public opinion, as J.S. Mill later maintained. But of this we cannot be sure. As for the private-property system, individuals were to be free to marry, even without a prospect of maintaining a family, for although 'an immoral act, yet it is not one which society can justly take upon itself to prevent or punish; because the punishment provided for it by the laws of nature falls directly and most severely upon the individual who commits the act, and through him, only remotely and feebly, on the society' (1803/1986, 3, 516). This perspective is difficult to appreciate since it seems to play down the social implications of irresponsible private behaviour, whereas the general

32 An early statement of the free-rider problem in relation to Malthus is by Lloyd, 1833. Waterman, 1991, I4if., offers an interpretation of our present text in terms of'target income' which avoids the free-rider problem. It is certainly true that Malthus championed savings banks as 'the best' proposal, in principle, 'to effect a permanent improvement in the condition of the lower classes of society,' by encouraging responsible planning by each individual (1817, III, 275). The problem, however, remains: whether because of general responsibility - the individual's target income can be achieved despite his own irresponsible behaviour.

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 911

utilitarian argument suggests that self-interested evaluations are acceptable in so far as they assure the greatest good. One can perhaps make sense of the position if we suppose that irresponsibility was taken by Mai thus as the probable exception.33 A related problem emerges when we contrast the utility-based arguments for moral restraint and for discrimination in private charity (above, p. 896). The former - taking into account an appropriate time span - is said usually to involve a surplus of net private as well as social happiness, whereas the latter seems to require private decisions based wholly on the social impact. The road is opened wide by this second application for social control to assure the desirable outcome should private decision making prove deficient in terms of the 'greatest happiness' criterion. Malthus does not seem to have taken the plunge, possibly because the current forms of intervention were pernicious and had still to be removed - that was the first task. And the problem was, in any event, an academic one (pp. 898-9). VIII

INCOME DISTRIBUTION

We turn now to income distribution as such, specifically Malthus's own qualification to the 'principal argument' of his 1798 essay pointing to 'the necessity of a class of proprietors, and a class of labourers' (1986, I, I02n). His qualification denied 'that the present great inequality of property, is either necessary or useful to society. On the contrary, it must certainly be considered as an evil, and every institution that promotes it is essentially bad and impolitic.' Similarly: 'Though in every civilized state, a class of proprietors and a class of labourers must exist; yet one permanent advantage would always result from a nearer equalization of property. The greater the number of proprietors, the smaller must be the number of

33 Cf. Bonar, 1924, 213: 'It has been said that Malthus was Utilitarian, but not Utilitarian enough; he should have kept more constantly before him the Greatest Happiness of the Greatest Number. But Malthus was a Utilitarian of the old school; the greatest happiness of the great body of the people seemed to him to be best secured by the devotion of the individual members of it, each to his own permanent and real happiness.' See also 227-8, regarding the relation between the Greatest Happiness principle and individual happiness: 'The only course open to the older Utilitarians would have been to have shown that the individuals best secures his own happiness by securing that of his fellows; but that is not shown by Bentham, who in fact rather takes his maxim for granted than proves it in any way. Even if they had taken this course, there would have been a difficulty. If each man is his own best judge, how can another (Bentham or any other legislator) judge for him. The simple statement of any individual, that he for his part did not find his happiness in the general good, would be unanswerable. It could only be answered on principles that go beyond the older Utilitarianism, with its principle of individual infallibility. It can only be answered when we recognize that the individual's pleasures or pains are no criterion even of his own good, and that there is an ideal of human life which is none of the individual's fixing.'

912 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

labourers: a greater part of society would be in the happy state of possessing property; and a smaller part in the unhappy state of possessing no property other than their labour' (121). The desirability of a more equal income distribution is reiterated in 1803, as we saw earlier (above, p. 893), with something of an aesthetic rationale in terms of the improved 'harmony and beauty' of society (1986, 5, 575-6). But more than that was intended. Malthus first reiterated the case for some degree of inequality: 'It has been generally found that the middle parts of society are most favourable to virtuous and industrious habits, and to the growth of all kinds of talents. But it is evident that all cannot be in the middle. Superior and inferior parts are in the nature of things absolutely necessary; and not only necessary, but strikingly beneficial. If no man could hope to rise, or fear to fall in society; if industry did not bring with it its reward, and indolence its punishment; we could not expect to see that animated activity in bettering our condition, which now forms the master-spring of public prosperity' (567). But he then allowed that in the current circumstances greater equality was justified: 'Our best-grounded expectations of an increase in the happiness of the mass of human society are founded in the prospect of an increase in the relative proportions of the middle parts.'34 This case relates to those 'virtuous and industrious habits' characteristic of the middle classes. Furthermore, with a large middle class - and also assuming a diminution by way of population control of those employed 'in severe toil' - the prospects for advance would be more conspicuous and inviting: 'If the lowest classes of society were thus diminished, and the middle classes increased, each labourer might indulge a more rational hope of rising by diligence and exertion into a better station; the rewards of industry and virtue would be increased in number; human society would appear to consist of fewer blanks and more prizes; and the sum of social happiness would be evidently augmented.' The utilitarian case for higher wages is also conspicuous in the Principles. After emphasizing the quantitative superiority of the labouring class, Malthus proceeds: 'Under the prevalence of habits of prudence, the whole of this vast mass might be nearly as happy as the individuals of the other two classes, and probably a greater number of them, though not a greater proportion of them, happier' (1820, 423; 1836, 368). Similarly: 'It is most desirable that the labouring classes should be well paid, for a much more important reason than any that can relate to wealth; namely the happiness of the great mass of society' (1820, 472; 1836, 405). The implications for 'wealth' of higher wages and more generally of greater equality are discussed above, in chapter 11, 'Sustainable Growth' (pp. 526-9, 561-2). Here we note only the rejection of Paley's case favour-

34 See also his reaction to the 1832 Reform Act (above, p. 906).

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 913

ing inequality - 'that the condition most favourable to the population of a country, and at the same time to its general happiness, is, "that of a laborious frugal people ministering to the demands of an opulent, luxurious nation"' (1803/1986, 3, 566). This position Malthus denied, having in mind both national wealth and national happiness and the high likelihood of instability with a narrowly based luxury-producing sector: 'Such a form of society has not, it must be confessed, an inviting aspect. Nothing but the conviction of its being absolutely necessary could reconcile us to the idea often millions of people condemned to incessant toil, and to the privation of everything but absolute necessaries, in order to minister to the excessive luxuries of the other million. But the fact is, that such a form of society is by no means necessary. It is by no means necessary, that the rich should be excessively luxurious, in order to support the manufactures of a country; or that the poor should be deprived of all luxuries, in order to make them sufficiently numerous. The best, and in every point of view the most advantageous manufactures in this country, are those which are consumed by the great body of the people. The manufactures which are confined exclusively to the rich are not only trivial, on account of the comparative smallness of their quantity; but are further liable to the great disadvantage of producing much occasional misery among those employed in them, from changes of fashion. It is the spread of luxury therefore among the mass of the people, and not an excess of it in a few, that seems to be most advantageous, both with regard to national wealth and national happiness; and what Dr. Paley considers as the true evil and proper danger of luxury, I should be disposed to consider as its true good, and peculiar advantage.'35 The fact that Paley is a major source of Mai thus's utilitarianism (see below, chapter 19) does not efface a profound difference between them regarding the conception of the greatest-good formula. It is precisely 35 There is no hint here of an anti-industrial tone. But this does not gainsay Mai thus's early opposition to 'commercial systems' (see chapter 17: II). Malthus refers in a note to an apparent change in Paley's position between Moral Philosophy (1785) and Natural Theology (1803) and draws a significant deduction regarding, so to speak, the optimal degree of luxury diffusion: 'From a passage in Paley's Natural theology, I am inclined to think that subsequent reflection induced him to modify some of his former ideas on the subject of population. He states most justly that mankind will in every country breed up to a certain point of distress [Natural theology 1803, 339]. If this be allowed, that country will evidently be the happiest, where the degree of distress at this point is the least; and consequently, if the spread of luxury, by producing the check sooner, tend to diminish this degree of distress, it is certainly desirable' (1803/1986, 3, 566n). The principle of population - Paley refers to Malthus's arithmetic and geometric rates - is, however, said by Paley to imply the impossibility 'to people a country with inhabitants who shall be all in easy circumstances,' leading to a justification of 'the distinctions of civil life' (Natural Theology, 340-1). Paley scarcely drew the same conclusion regarding income distribution as Malthus. His message was to be taken up by Sumner, 1816 (see Waterman, 1983, 204-5; 1991, 160-70).

914 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

these details that matter in practical policy applications of the general rule. IX

CONCLUSION

There is little excuse for charging Malthus with spawning a dismal doctrine. The thrust of Malthus's welfare position points to an increased degree of appropriation of the national surplus by labour. It is significant that his utilitarianism turns on the well-being of the median member of society, bearing as this does a more democratic flavour than one based simply on the mean. Senior appended to his Two Lectures on Population (1829) a correspondence between himself and Malthus in which he candidly admitted to having misread the Essay on Population and publicly apologized for having ascribed to Malthus a denial of'the possibility of permanent improvement,' a 'caricature' which he hoped would 'gradually wear away' (Senior, 1829, 55-7 > 81, 88-9). As Senior originally understood the Essay, it conveyed the message that a temporary increase in wages will inevitably be cancelled in consequence of population pressure — a view he rejected: The problem of population pressure was 'likely to diminish in the progress of improvement' as tastes become more sophisticated; indeed, the experience of high wages would in all probability generate the elevation of tastes (minimum standards) required to render any improvement permanent (Senior, 35; cf. 74-5)- This was in fact Malthus's own position (as he explained to Senior in conversation). For the misreading, Senior blamed Malthus's form of expression: 'I was misled by your use of the word "tendency." I supposed you to believe, that the desire of marriage, which tends to increase Population, is a stronger principle, or, in other words, a principle more efficacious in its results than the desire of bettering our condition, which tends to increase subsistence; and, consequently, that in an old country, with a people so fully supplied with necessaries as to make it possible for population to increase in a greater ratio than food, such an increase would, in the absence of disturbing causes, be a more probable event than the opposite event; namely, than an increase of subsistence in a greater ratio than that of population. I believe that I was led into this error principally by the conduct of all those writers who, since the appearance of your work, have written on Population. The multitudes who have followed, and a few who have endeavoured to oppose you, have all assumed this to be your opinion. And yet when I recur to your writings, I see how inconsistent it is with your uniform statement, that the pressure upon subsistence is almost always the most severe in the rudest states of society, where the population is the least dense, and the means of procuring subsistence, supposing they were employed, would be the greatest in proportion to that population' (56-7). Malthus explained that his formulation had been designed to impress the message that the solution to low wages or the maintenance of im-

SOCIAL REFORM AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT 915

proved wages lay in population control (71-2). But he admitted that he would have been more careful had he been aware of the danger of misinterpretation (60). All he intended was the notion 'that population was always ready, and inclined, to increase faster than food, if the checks which repressed it were removed' (61) - whereupon Senior again pointed out that 'many, perhaps the majority of your readers, adopt the proposition without the qualification,' believing 'that the expansive power of population is a source of evil incapable not only of being subdued, but even of being mitigated' (79). The attribution to Malthus of the notion that reform was to no purpose had given political economy a bad name and was the regrettable outcome of the misunderstanding which Senior hoped would be cleared away once and for all: 'Undoubtedly these opinions are not fair inferences from your work; they are, indeed, directly opposed to the spirit of the greater part of it; but I think they must be considered as having been occasioned by a misconception of your reasoning. They are prevalent now: before the appearance of your writings, they were never hinted at. I trust, however, that, unsupported as they are by your authority, they will gradually wear away; and I anticipate from their disappearance not merely the extinguishment of an error, but the removal of an obstacle to the diffusion of political knowledge' (81-2) .36 Little could the correspondents have expected that the old saw would be repeatedly resuscitated.37 The more general question of the legitimate role allowed government, we have also seen, was approached by Malthus in a well-balanced manner. There was an initial presumption favouring laissez-faire, but the 'exceptions' had to be explicitly and conspicuously debated to defend the reputation of economic principles' (above, section VI). Some of Malthus's allowances for government are surprisingly 'liberal,' his evaluations varying with the immediacy and potency of the 'population problem.' But we must also recall from chapter 12 (p. 615) a denial of any role for government in regulating the rate of savings, despite all his concerns with instability reflecting deficient aggregate demand. Though this might seem to conflict with his own appeal in the Introduction to the Principles to avoid extreme positions on policy, such criticism would be somewhat anachronistic,

36 Cf. McCulloch: 'Malthus ... did not lay sufficient stress on the influence of the circumstances under which population is placed, and of the prudential considerations which they invariably bring along with them, in determining the rate of increase; and they have been all but overlooked by several of his followers. Hence the theory of population gave rise for a while to the most unreasonable fears and unfounded conclusions ... But the principle of increase is not the bugbear, the invincible obstacle to all real improvement, supposed by those who put forth such statements' (1864, 174-5). 37 Stigler (1965, 172) understood Senior in an 'ironic' sense. Such a reading of Senior's published remarks seems unjustified, but cannot be wholly excluded considering a most critical comment regarding Malthus made privately to a correspondent (see Conclusion, p. 994).

916 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

implying as it does the ability of contemporary governments to intervene in an appropriate and timely fashion. Mai thus's positive allowances for intervention as far as concerns aggregate activity were rather of a remedial nature, and included emigration, public works, and poor relief; for the rest, with cyclical instability specifically in mind, and 'with a view to the happiness of the great mass of society, it should be our object, as far as possible, to maintain peace, and an equable expenditure' (1820, 522; 1836, 437).

NINETEEN

Utilitarianism in a theological context

I

INTRODUCTION

Whether Malthus was a 'Utilitarian' is still a debated issue. D.P. O'Brien, for example, maintains that 'only the two Mills, part from Bentham himself, were really Utilitarians' (1Q75, 25). Against this we have the view of Lord Robbins: 'The principle that the test of policy is to be its effect on human happiness ... is common to all the English Classical Economists. We get the picture badly out of focus if we conceive that reliance on the principle of utility was confined to Bentham and his immediate circle' (1952, 177). The justice of Robbins's perspective has been demonstrated in chapter 18 with specific reference to the population problem. A related issue is considered in this chapter: the role of Malthus's theodicy in establishing him as a 'theological' utilitarian. The final two chapters of the first edition of the Essay on Population (1798) treat the compatibility of the 'disheartening' outcome of the population principle with a beneficent deity. The theodicy in these chapters, it has been argued, 'though often treated as an embarrassing and detachable part of the Essay ... contains essential clues to the form of theological utilitarianism which underlies Malthus's moral philosophy' (Winch, 1987, 18-19). The removal of these concluding chapters in the later editions should not be misinterpreted: 'It is a mistake to believe that Malthus abandoned the brand of theological utilitarianism contained in his earlier dieodicy in order to become a more secular social theorist; there was no conflict between Malthus the Christian "moral" philosopher and Malthus the scientist. The retention of the categories of vice and virtue, alongside, indeed attached to, pain and happiness, testify to their continuing importance. Indeed, an understanding of what precisely was 'moral' about moral

918 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

restraint requires constant reference to the methodological standpoint of the theological utilitarian, for whom the greatest surplus of virtue and happiness over vice and misery was the supreme criterion for judging the worth of individual actions and social outcomes' (37).' I do not deny a 'moral' dimension to Malthus's utilitarianism, though the same holds true with respect to Bentham and Mill. But my analysis supports Lord Robbins's position that Malthus's explanation of 'disharmonies' by reference to Divine Wisdom is 'extraneous to analysis' and without influence on the theory of policy (1952, 28n).2 More strongly, the last two chapters in the 1798 essay turn out to be an embarrassment, and the apologia for a benevolent Deity is radically altered in later editions. Whether Malthus envisaged a net balance of temporal good, taking into account this world considered across time and space, is not absolutely clear from the theological chapters. But it is clear that what temporal good is envisaged is there unrelated to the magnitude of labour's per-capita income; aggregate population takes centre stage. And from his universalist perspective, Malthus represented the 'distress' characterizing the specific case of 'old setded countries' - such as Britain - as a partial evil that is overwhelmingly outweighed when full allowance is made for the purely spiritual dimension (and possibly outweighed, one should add, even on a universal-

1 Cf. Winch, 1983: 'It is well known that Malthus modified his position in the second Essay by emphasising the preventive check of moral restraint; he also withdrew some of his more heterodox theological speculations. Nevertheless, neither the natural theology nor the moral categories of vice and virtue disappears when the Essay became a more academic treatise in demography* (70). Winch (1993) restates his case but, in my opinion, without adequately weighing the available evidence (see below, note 31). See also Pullen, 1981, on the theological basis for Malthus's approach to the population issue: 'In all editions of the Essay there are aspects of Malthus' theory of population which are unintelligible or contradictory if they are divorced from his theological ideas ... For example, having argued that population pressure leads to misery and vice, it would seem illogical for him to state that population growth per se is desirable. One would have expected him to advocate zero population growth. But within his theological system there is no contradiction, because he believed that it is the will of the Creator that the earth should be filled and because he saw the constant and universal pressure of population as a necessary and desirable stimulus for growth of mind' (53). 2 See, too, Rashid, 1984, 137, who disputes Pullen's claim that Malthus's theodicy is integral to Malthus's thinking: 'Malthus attached importance to his theory of mind, but only as a mode of reconciling us to the goodness of God and not because it added to the logical or factual acceptability of his theory.' Also Bonar, 1924, 38f. who considered the theodicy to be materially insignificant for the principle of population. Even Winch, who insists on the continued significance of the theological dimension in the second and subsequent editions, allows that 'the significance of all this for Malthus's views on politics and the science of political economy should not be exaggerated,' for he debated with economists 'without decisive recourse to theodicy' (71). Similarly, Waterman emphasizes 'moral restraint' as an essentially theological concept, but also recognizes that 'the specification "moral restraint" as a species of the preventive check makes no difference whatsoever to the body of "economic analysis" ..." (1991, 136, 144-50).

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 919

1st temporal view). This may satisfy theologians, but it clashes with the first Essay as a whole where, when dealing with the specifics of the British case, the magnitude of labour's per-capita income is the central policy concern, and suggestions are made for the mitigation of poverty through social and private action. The Essay closes, it is true, with a protestation that the theological message is not one of 'despair,' since the quantity of 'evil' varies with activity or indolence. This might appear to open the door for improvement in living standards. But the theme is stated at the same universalist level as the rest of the chapter rather than with any eye to the specifics of any particular case. And in any event Malthus felt constrained, as we shall see, to reiterate that evil could never 'be removed from the world' and that any variation in its weight with activity is designed Providentially to 'keep alive a constant expectation of throwing it off,' which seems to withdraw much of the initial allowance, unless (and this may indeed be the case) it relates specifically to individual instances of improvement. There is in addition a problem emerging in the body of the Essay but conspicuously absent from the last two chapters - that any reduction in misery entails, in practice, vice, casting doubt on the benevolence of the Deity. It is this problem, brought to Mai thus's attention by critics of the first Essay, that led him to introduce the matter of 'moral restraint,' though (as will be recalled from chapter 18: V) he believed it to be empirically irrelevant. A theological dimension thus certainly remains in 1803 and thereafter - the mere fact that the two concluding chapters of 1798 disappear as such is of no consequence. Indeed, it is fair to say that the defence of the Deity is reinforced - though only if limited to an ideal rather than the real world, considering the practical insignificance of restraint. Even so, its substance differs from that of 1798. First, there is no longer any emphasis on the training of mind for a future existence, the most characteristic feature of the 1798 theodicy;3 indeed there is considerable evidence that Malthus (perhaps as early as 1806) abandoned his unorthodox position. Second, the case for a reduction of poverty is now formally and conspicuously represented as a 'moral' issue, so that the theological problem is no longer to explain 'distress' but to explain the need for 'painful' checks to avoid distress. Malthus also addressed the moral implications of the practical trade-off between vice and misery. But he approached practical policy issues in the manner of a social reformer, basing his recommendations on 'secular' utilitarian calculations; his taking account of 'vice' and 'virtue' does not gainsay this orientation, for the central feature of the theodicy of 1798 (training of mind for a 'superior' state of happiness) no longer plays a

3 A notion of training or 'improvement' of the mind remains which counteracts 'indolence' (below, pp. 930-1), but without the same weight on a future existence.

920 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

significant role. As for specifics, he was as much opposed to Church and State pressures towards a large population regardless of the consequences for living standards as he was to 'communist schemes' threatening the same outcome.4 J.S. Mill adopted precisely this orientation: 'This great [Malthusian] doctrine, originally brought forward as an argument against the indefinite improvability of human affairs, we [the Philosophical Radicals] took up with ardent zeal in the contrary sense, as indicating the sole means of realizing that improvability by securing full employment at high wages to the whole labouring population through a voluntary restriction of the increase of their numbers' (1873/1981, I, 108). This comment on the 'original' doctrine is fair only if said of the theological chapters since, elsewhere in the first Essay, Malthus had pointed to the solution. But at least Mill recognized that a positive reformist attitude had ultimately been adopted by Malthus himself: 'Few writers have done more than himself, in the subsequent editions, to promote ... juster and more hopeful anticipations' (1848/1965,111, 753)-5 Section II, below, is devoted to the theological chapters of the 1798 version and the tension between them and the body of the work. Section III elaborates on the implicit secular or utilitarian orientation of the first Essay manifested particularly in the recommendation of prudential control, despite the inevitability of 'vice.' The following section considers moral restraint within a utilitarian framework, and demonstrates Mai thus's continued efforts in 1803 and thereafter - despite the omission of the formal chapters on theology - to reconcile dogma and utility, a process

4 It is still common enough to read of Malthus's 'conservatism.' See, for example, Sowell, 1962, 268, 1974, 28; Taylor, 1960, 147. This matter is treated ambiguously in Winch's account (1983, 70-1). Winch maintains that 'neither the natural theology nor the moral categories of vice and virtue disappeared when the Essay became a more academic treatise on demography,' and that Malthus extended his criticism of Utopian planners to include Robert Owen. 'It would seem, therefore, that Malthus takes his place in a long tradition of Anglican apologetics for inequality and poverty,' differentiating him 'from more secular devotees of political economy.' But at the same time we are told not to exaggerate all this when it comes to political economy: 'Malthus's population doctrine proved capable of being absorbed into political economy, with or without its natural theology overtones.' By thus using the passive voice - and alluding to the applications made of the doctrine by others (Dugald Stewart and J.S. Mill) - Winch seems to imply that Malthus himself in the Essay on Population falls into the apologetic school of divines. 5 For Mill's reading of the first essay as 'pessimistic,' see also 1879/1967, V, 728, and the comment on Hamilton's Philosophy (1865/1979, IX, 109-10). Mill in 1859 protested against Edwin Chadwick's 'slur on Malthus' (1972, XV, 590). Others, outside the sphere of the Philosophical Radicals, also pointed to the reformist orientation of the Essay on Population. As we have seen in chapter 18: IX, Nassau Senior publicly apologized to Malthus for having lectured on population under a false impression of his position (a 'caricature') and hoped that the misconceptions 'unsupported as they are by your authority ... will gradually wear away.'

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 921

involving effectively the undermining of the theological foundation. Section V carries this theme further, from the perspective of prudential control tout court as justified in terms of a net balance of social utility, very much in line with the procedures of the secular utilitarians. The desirability of population expansion from a utility perspective, sharply contrasting with the standard religious case, is discussed in section VI; the argument is shown to open the door even to the justification of a stationary state in some circumstances. There are, it emerges, two theological stances - one emphasizing the ideal solution to the danger of potential population pressure; the other taking mankind as it is in fact, and arriving at a different set of recommendations. The concluding section summarizes the reasons for the decision to delete the theological chapters. II

THE THEOLOGICAL CHAPTERS OF THE FIRST ESSAY

The last two chapters of the 1798 Essay are designed to 'vindicate the ways of God to man' in the light of 'the constant pressure of distress on man from the difficulty of subsistence' (1986, 1, 122).6 Malthus proceeded, as in an earlier footnote, to make a case envisaging this world as 'a mighty process for the creation and formation of mind' from matter, in the course of which 'many vessels will necessarily come out of this great furnace in wrong shapes. These will be broken and thrown aside as useless; while those vessels whose forms are full of truth, grace, and loveliness, will be wafted into happier situations, nearer the presence of the mighty maker' (88n).7 This conception contrasts with a view of the world as a 'state of

6 Malthus approached his problem from the standpoint of natural theology, rejecting reliance upon the supernatural, revelation, or scriptural authority: 'it seems absolutely necessary, that we should reason from nature up to nature's God, and not presume to reason from God to nature' (350). Malthus does not always live up to this objective, often identified with that of Paley. Paley, too, however, pointed in his Moral and Political Philosophy to 'two methods of coming at the will of God on any point: 'I. By his express declarations, when they are to be had; and which must be sought for in Scripture. II. By what we can discover of his designs and disposition from his works, or, as we usually call it, the light of nature' (ist ed., 1785, 54). Moreover, the work is replete with scriptural reference. This is true inter alia of the case favouring retribution in the next world (41). Paley also proceeded by assertion. Thus the affirmative answer to the question 'Will there be after this life, any distribution of rewards and punishments at all? ... the foundation, upon which the whole fabric rests, must in this treatise be taken for granted' (53-4). 7 Bonar (1924, 35, 323f.) traces the influence of Abraham Tucker's Light of Nature Pursued (see also Waterman 1983, 196-200; 1991, 101-6). Malthus himself made explicit reference to John Locke for the general emphasis on the 'endeavour to avoid pain' as a stimulus to exertion, to which he adds his theme that exertion is a prerequisite for creation of mind (1986, /, 125-6). For other possible sources - the English empirical school and English Neoplatonism - see Harvey-Phillips, 1984, 598-9. The notion of formation of mind is repeatedly restated in one form or other. There

922 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

trial, and school of virtue, preparatory to a superior state of happiness,' since that implied 'a previously formed existence, that does not agree with the appearance of man in infancy1 (122-3).8 The essential difference is between the tribulations of existence constituting a course of training Malthus's position; and one of probation or testing or trial - Paley's view (see especially 131). Punishment is the consequence of failure on this latter view, whereas the former entails no question of future punishment, but rather 'merely condemning to their original insensibility those beings, that, by the operation of general laws, had not been formed with qualities suited to a purer state of happiness.' There remains some doubt whether Malthus conceived a net balance of purely temporal good when he summarized by asserting that 'vice' and 'misery' are aspects of the 'infinite variety of nature' and 'admirably adapted to further the high purpose of the creation, and to produce the greatest possible quantity of good' (132). There is, it is true, an effect of general and constant laws of nature on mind, and thus on temporal activity of all kinds: 'the industry and foresight of the husbandman; the indefatigable ingenuity of the artificer; the skilful researches of the physician, and anatomist; and the watchful observation, and patient investigation of the natural philosopher' (126-7). But the weight of concentration is overwhelmingly on activity resulting in aggregative expansion of numbers - not increase in per-capita income; here lies the Providential design regarding population: 'As the reasons ... for the constancy of the laws of nature, seem, even to our understandings, obvious and striking; if we return to the principle of population, and consider man as he really is, inert, sluggish, and averse from labour, unless compelled by necessity ... we may pronounce, with certainty, that the world would not have been peopled, but

is in the first of the two chapters, for example, reference to the impressions and excitements of this world acting to awaken man's 'sluggish existence ... into a capacity of superior enjoyment' (124), to increase 'acuteness of intellect' (125), and to 'rouse man into action and form his mind to reason' (126). This is reiterated and applied in the second of the chapters: 'When the mind has been awakened into activity by the passions, and the wants of the body, intellectual wants arise; and the desire of knowledge, and the impatience under ignorance, form a new and important class of excitements' (131-2). Thus the apparently negative aspects of existence 'furnish endless motives to intellectual activity and exertion,' and the effort to understand 'invigorates and improves the thinking faculty' and provides 'stimulants to mental exertion' (133-4). Fully and effortlessly to understand God's plan would 'tend to repress further exertion, and to dampen the soaring wings of intellect' (134). 8 The view that human life constitutes a state of probation or trial was advanced by Butler and Paley (though it goes back to Origen, third century) and taken up by Sumner in 1816 (see Waterman, 1983, 198, 205-6; 1991, 65, 160-70). There is no formal discussion of this perspective in Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy. A convenient statement will be found in Paley's posthumously published 'Sermons on Several Subjects' (1850).

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 923

for the superiority of the power of population to the means of subsistence ... It keeps the inhabitants of the earth always fully up to the level of the means of subsistence; and is constantly acting upon man as a powerful stimulus, urging him to the further cultivation of the earth, and to enable it, consequently, to support a more extended population. But it is impossible that this law can operate, and produce the effects apparently intended by the supreme Being, without occasioning partial evil. Unless the principle of population were to be altered, according to the circumstances of each separate country ...; it is evident, that the same principle, which, seconded by industry, will people a fertile region in a few years, must produce distress in countries that have been long inhabited' (127). Malthus asserted at one point that 'life is generally speaking, a blessing independent of a future state' (136). But the argument of the foregoing passage - which does not specify why larger population size is desirable apart from a presumed Divine intention - proceeds at so general a level as to allow representation of the 'distress in countries that have been long inhabited' as nothing but a 'partial eviV to be expected in any universalist environment subject to general laws of nature. Any temporal balance of good need not pertain to a specific region such as Great Britain. Moreover, even a universal balance of good does not incorporate the effect on happiness of high living standards. We must also have in mind the primary concern, which is training of the mind for the next world. Within that broad theological frame of reference, it is easy to appreciate why motive matters: 'If the scriptural denunciations of eternal punishment were brought home with the same certainty to every man's mind, as that the night will follow the day, this one vast and gloomy idea would take such full possession of the human faculties, as to leave no room for any other conceptions: the external actions of men would be all nearly alike; virtuous conduct would be no indication of virtuous disposition; vice and virtue would be blended together in one common mass; and, though the all-seeing eye of God might distinguish them, they must necessarily make the same impressions on man, who can judge only from external appearances. Under such a dispensation, it is difficult to conceive how human beings could be formed to a detestation of moral evil, and a love and admiration of God, and of moral excellence' (134-5). It is thus in a world of uncertainty alone that one is justified in assuming that virtuous behaviour reflects virtuous motive, and conversely in the case of vicious behaviour, making it possible to learn to detest 'moral evil' (an idea to be found in Paley's Natural Theology, as is clarified in Waterman, 1992, 131-2). And 'moral evil is absolutely necessary to the production of moral excellence' precisely because it generates abhorrence in others (131). This orientation implies that any scope for moral improvement applies to individuals, not to entire national groupings. The same seems to be true of a reduction in physical misery. For 'sorrows and distresses' are said to

924 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

be necessary to excite sentiments of humanity, 'social sympathy,' 'Christian virtues' and to provide opportunities for the 'ample exertion of benevolence' (130). This theme requires further attention, considering a caution given at the very close of the Essay. 'Evil exists in the world, not to create despair, but activity. We are not patiently to submit to it, but to exert ourselves to avoid it' (137). The effort to overcome evil is in fact represented as a 'duty': 'It is not only the interest but the duty of every individual, to use his utmost efforts to remove evil from himself, and from as large a circle as he can influence; and the more he exercises himself in this duty, the more wisely he directs his efforts, and the more successful these efforts are; the more he will probably improve and exalt his own mind, and the more completely does he appear to fulfil the will of his Creator.' The denial that the proposed solution to the problem of evil implies an absence of scope for improvement is elaborated thus: 'The idea that the impressions and excitements of this world are the instruments with which the Supreme Being forms matter into mind; and that the necessity of constant exertion to avoid evil, and to pursue good, is the principal spring of these impressions and excitements, seems to smooth many of the difficulties that occur in a contemplation of human life; and appears to me, to give a satisfactory reason for the existence of natural and moral evil; and, consequently, for that part of both, and it certainly is not a very small part, which arises from the principle of population. But, though upon this supposition, it seems highly improbable, that evil should ever be removed from the world; yet it is evident, that this impression would not answer the apparent purpose of the Creator; it would not act so powerfully as an excitement to exertion, if the quantity of it did not diminish or increase, with the activity or the indolence of man. The continual variations in the weight, and in the distribution of this pressure, keep alive a constant expectation of throwing it off.' We again have here a universalist perspective, rendering it unclear whether Malthus intended a balance of temporal good in any particular country, including his own. And at the end of the passage he seems to withdraw much of the implicit allowance for improvement - unless we read him as recognizing only the possibility of individuals successfully rising above the mass. To summarize the 'solution' proposed for the theological problem: On a universal level independent of time and space, there is said to be a net balance even of temporal good ('life is, generally speaking a blessing independent of a future state'). But the 'good' in question is unrelated to the level of per-capita income; and Malthus leaves open the possibility that, considering any specific region, particularly an old-settled country such as Britain, population pressure generates actual 'distress,' albeit a 'partial' evil in the broader context encompassing spiritual training for the next world. Within that broad context Malthus considered that the 'partial pain ... inflicted by the supreme Creator, while he is forming numberless beings to a capacity of the highest enjoyments, is but as the dust of the balance in comparison of the happiness that is communicated' (136). The positive

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 925

case closes with the assertion that 'we have every reason to think, that there is no more evil in the world, than what is absolutely necessary as one of the ingredients of the mighty process.' As noted, it is in the closing paragraphs of the Essay that we find the warning against 'despair.' This suggests a certain unease with the substantive defence of the Deity in the light of 'the constant pressure of distress on man from the difficulty of subsistence.' The temporal improvement allowed relates to both a diminution of 'natural' and 'moral' evil, that is, of poverty and vice. But there is an unfortunate vagueness about the allowance since it is not clarified whether such improvement is applicable to Britain and how precisely it would be achieved. The problem reflects to some extent a more basic ambiguity - whether the Providential ordinance relates to a potentially or an actually excessive growth rate of population relative to that of food; only if the problem is one of potentiality can it be avoided. On balance, we have suggested, Mai thus's appeal against despair seems to open the door to individual rather than collective improvement; the problem remains one of actual population pressure in old-settled states. It is only in the body of the first Essay that one finds the solution to the problem of poverty at the national level in the specific British case - it amounts, of course, to prudential control. However, prudential control entails vice, so that there emerges a trade-off between misery and vice. Mai thus's defence of the Deity is thus already in difficulty in 1798. Apparently Malthus did not realize this when he published his apologia, but it was immediately brought to his attention by critics. It was this newly appreciated theological difficulty that led him to introduce moral restraint as an alternative to misery and vice, as we shall see in section IV.

Before proceeding we might consider the subsequent history of Malthus's theological position. Pullen argues the case that Malthus was persuaded to omit the two theological chapters because of their unorthodoxy - the denial of life as a state of trial or testing or probation, the notion of conditional immortality and the rejection of original sin - but did not retract his original views (igSia, 48, 50).9 Waterman, on the other hand,

9 There is some indication to this effect in a letter dated i March 1799 to the Monthly Magazine touching on the projected rewriting of the Essay: 'As the subject of the two last chapters is not necessarily connected with it, I shall, in deference to the opinion of some friends whose judgments I respect, omit them' (cited in Rashid, 1984, 137). Moreover, in the Preface to the 1803 edition - though removed in 1806 - Malthus wrote: 'I should hope that there are some parts of it [the first essay], not reprinted in this, which may still have their use; as they were rejected, not because I thought them all of less value than what has been inserted, but because they did not suit the different plan of treating the subject which I had adopted' (1803/1986, 2, ii).

926 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

maintains that Malthus finally adopted Paley's (and Sumner's) position, which considers this world to be a state of 'probation' or trial, providing challenges that invite improving solutions extending to the introduction of 'moral restraint' itself (1983, 205-6; 1991, 146-7, 172; see also HarveyPhillips, 1984). And this latter view seems convincing.10 The significance of the abandonment of the original theodicy in favour of Paley's is, we shall find, suggestive of a more 'mundane' treatment of the benevolence of God.11 Certainly Mai thus's original position is centred on training for the next world. Ill A UTILITY CALCULUS, 1798

We have seen from a passage in the theological chapters of the first Essay that, for Malthus, motive mattered in the classification of virtuous behaviour (above, p. 923). More specifically: 'Our ideas of virtue and vice are not, perhaps, very accurate and well defined; but few, I think, would call an action really virtuous, which was performed simply and solely from the

10 The evidence includes the removal of the 1803 Preface referring to continued adherence to the original theology; and (more positively) a passage in the 1817 Appendix, following favourable reference to Sumner (1816) commencing: 'I have always considered the principle of population as a law peculiarly suited to a state of discipline and trial' (1817, III, 426). Taken literally this passage is a blatant untruth, for Malthus originally strongly denied the notion of life 'as a state of discipline and trial.' (Malthus also alludes to a 'competent tribunal' which induced him to expunge materials, apart from the two theological chapters, 'which have been thought too harsh, and not sufficiently indulgent to the weaknesses of human nature, and the feelings of Christian charity.') There is also the conclusion to the article 'Population' (1824). Here Malthus raises the original issue of the 1798 theological chapters: 'It has been thought that a tendency in mankind to increase, beyond the greatest possible increase of food which could be produced in a limited space, impeaches the goodness of the Deity, and is inconsistent with the letter and spirit of the Scriptures' (l824b/l986, 4, 239). In the brief defence of the Deity that follows, there is not a whisper of the original 1798 position regarding creation of mind but rather the assertion that 'it is almost universally acknowledged, that both the letter and spirit of revelation represent this world as a state of moral discipline and probation.' I owe to A.M.C. Waterman the reminder that James Mill objected on purely secular grounds to Malthus's theology, viewing it as confused (in Ricardo, 1951-73, VII, 2l2n). 11 The categories may, however, have been breaking down for all parties. It is striking that the notion of life as a state of trial or probation as discussed by Paley in Natural Theology - where it is attributed to Rousseau (see Paley, 1803, 357) - seems to absorb Malthus's original theological position and put it to similar use. Thus the trials and tribulations of life 'all serve for the formation of character: for, when we speak of a state of trial, it must be remembered, that characters are not only tried, or proved, or detected, but that they are generated also And formed, by circumstances' (355). Moreover, this is asserted with an eye to 'a future state': 'A future state alone rectifies all disorders; and if it can be shewn that the appearance of disorder is consistent with the uses of life, as a preparatory state, or that in some respects it promotes these uses, then, so far as this hypothesis may be accepted, the ground of the difficulty is done away.'

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 927

dread of a very great punishment, or the expectation of a very great reward' - an allusion to 'future' punishment and reward contained in scripture (1986, /, 135). This perhaps constitutes an implicit criticism of Paley. For Paley maintained not only that 'actions are to be estimated by their tendency to promote happiness. — Whatever is expedient, is right. It is the utility of any moral rule alone which constitutes the obligation to it' (1785, 61); but also that virtue differed from prudence only in allowing for the consequences in the next world as well as this: 'In the one case, we consider what we shall get or lose in this world; in the other case, we consider also what we shall get or lose in the world to come' (53).12 It is all the more interesting to encounter in the body of the first Essay a utilitarian perspective on moral behaviour - involving, incidentally, a version of the psychological principle of satiety - and one that seems to run in terms of temporal consequences alone: 'Intemperance in every enjoyment defeats its own purpose. A walk in the finest day, through the most beautiful country, if pursued too far, ends in pain and fatigue. The most wholesome and invigorating food, eaten with an unrestrained appetite, produces weakness, instead of strength. Even intellectual pleasures, though certainly less liable than others to satiety, pursued with too little intermission, debilitate the body, and impair the vigour of the mind. To

12 On this see Stephen, 1QOO, I, 161. Stephen observed that Taley's conception of the Deity is, in fact, coincident with Bentham's conception of the sovereign. He is simply an invisible sovereign, operating by tremendous sanction' (II, 358; cf. Ill, 309). Jacob Viner points out that the later Cambridge revolt led by William Whewell against Paley's Principles 'was in part due to the fact that except for its addition of pleasures and pains in the future life to the pleasure—pain calculus, it was a close counterpart of Bentham's completely irreligious hedonic utilitarianism" (1972, 74). In his early criticism of Bentham, Mill objected to the narrowness of Bentham's philosophy as implying a view of morality akin to 'the doctrine of expediency as professed by Paley' (1833/1969, X, 7)To be fair to Paley we must keep in mind a qualification to the generalization: 'Actions in the abstract are right or wrong, according to their tendency; the agent is virtuous or vicious, accordingly to his design. Thus, if the question be, Whether relieving common beggars be right or wrong? we inquire into the tendency of such a conduct to the public advantage or inconvenience. If the question be, Whether a man remarkable for this sort of bounty is to be esteemed virtuous for that reason? we inquire into his design, whether his liberality sprang from charity or from ostentation? It is evident that our concern is with actions in the abstract' (1785, 6in). It is not wholly clear on this view how to classify charity undertaken from fear of 'future' consequences or expectation of 'future' reward, but apparently the agent's good design might be thus dictated without loss of virtue. It is this that Malthus disputed. J.S. Mill came to Paley's defence against a misreading by Sedgwick: 'Paley held, with other Christians, that our place hereafter would be determined by our degree of moral perfection; that is, by the balance, not of our good and evil deeds, which depend on opportunity and temptation, but of our good and evil dispositions; by the intensity and continuity of our will to do good' (1835/1969, X, 70). However, Mill also emphasized the role for Paley of 'simple self-interest as the motive, of virtue' (1852/1969, X, 170).

928 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

argue against the reality of these pleasures from their abuse, seems to be hardly just. Morality, according to Mr. Godwin [1796,1, 73], is a calculation of consequences, or, as Archdeacon Paley very justly expresses it, the will of God, as collected from general expediency [cf. 1785, 423]. According to either of these definitions, a sensual pleasure, not attended with the probability of unhappy consequences, does not offend against the laws of morality: and if it be pursued with such a degree of temperance, as to leave the most ample room for intellectual attainments, it must undoubtedly add to the sum of pleasurable sensations in life' (77). There was then nothing immoral attached to a sensual pleasure if unattended with the probability of unhappy consequences. This perspective seems to govern an implicit secular utility calculus running through the first Essay, one purpose of which was to define the set of institutions which reduces the force of the population problem. That the criterion implicitly adopted is that of utility in the sense of a balance of temporal (though not necessarily material) happiness emerges most clearly from the dual propositions that 'prudential' population control 'almost necessarily, though not absolutely so, produces vice' (14), and - as we saw in chapter 18 (p. 883) - that 'vice' itself generates unhappiness - defined in purely temporal terms: 'The effects ... of these [preventive] restraints upon marriage are but too conspicuous in the consequent vices that are produced in almost every part of the world; vices, that are continually involving both sexes in inextricable unhappiness' (28). More strongly, a case against the outdoor poor-relief system intimates the toleration of prudence as a necessary evil for the sake of avoiding misery - the toleration of vice on a net balance of consequence: 'Every obstacle in the way of marriage must undoubtedly be considered a species of unhappiness. But as from the laws of our nature some check to population must exist, it is better that it should be checked from a foresight of the difficulties attending a family, and the fear of dependent poverty, than that it should be encouraged, only to be repressed afterwards by want and sickness' (35). The implicit secular orientation of Mai thus's position requires elaboration. An anonymous critic of the first Essay wrote that 'without intending it, however, we think the author, in this essay, has furnished the best apology for prostitution, that has ever been written' (Analytical Review 28, 124).13 The point is that Malthus, by dealing with the social problem in the body of his 1798 Essay in terms of man 'as he is,' was adopting a position conflicting with the theological viewpoint of the last two chapters,

13 The same point has been made in the account by Flew, which refers to an 'embarrassing implication' for Malthus of his original statement: 'In so far as the sum of (the relevant sorts of) vice and misery provides a necessary check and in so far as such vice and misery are alternatives, it follows that to indulge in (any relevant form of) vice must be to reduce misery' (1970, 48).

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 929

where there is no hint of any trade-off, but merely the tangential suggestion that both 'natural' and 'moral evil' (misery and vice) can be reduced - and this apparently, we have found, only in individual cases. Flew remarks that the 'unnoticed moral of the First Essay is very similar to the notorious paradox of Mandeville's Fable of the bees: "private vices, public benefits'" (1970, 48). Similar charges were made in Malthus's lifetime (although not necessarily in our specific context), and Malthus later denied them: 'Let me not be supposed to give the slightest sanction to the system of morals inculcated in the Fable of the Bees, a system which I consider as absolutely false, and directly contrary to the just definition of virtue' (1806, II, 523n). But what Malthus was here defending is only the general proposition that by the individual's pursuit 'as his primary object, [of] his own safety and happiness, and the safety and happiness of those immediately connected with him ... the most ignorant are led to promote the general happiness, an end which they would have totally failed to attain, if the moving principle of their conduct had been benevolence' (522-3). He did not have his implicit allowance for 'vice' in mind in this context. That allowance does, in fact, carry the Mandeville message, and clashes with the theological chapters. When Malthus became conscious of the clash is an interesting question. In a letter to the Monthly Magazine, dated 1 March 1799 (though dealing with war rather than sex), he strongly denied that he had ever intended to justify vice as an alternative to misery: 'In whatever light we view the situation of man, on earth, he can never be justified in recurring to vice in order to avoid misery. To bear the unavoidable evils of life with unyielding integrity is the highest test of our virtue; to attempt to escape them by vicious means is the great proof of our weakness, and of our unfitness for a superior state' (cited Rashid, 1984, 136). This particular letter reflects the theological position of the last two chapters.14 Malthus was apparently not yet willing to face the implication of his own observations in the body of the text.15 Malthus pointed to the intended implications of 'moral restraint,' or postponement of marriage not followed by 'irregular gratifications,' in the Preface to the second edition (see chapter 18, p. 886). This statement, which stamped the first Essay as a depressing document, is unfortunate since Malthus's demonstration in the body of that version that poverty and misery are 'absolutely irremediable' held good only in the absence of prudential behaviour. And from the outset - again in the body of the essay rather 14 Though there is this difference, that the final clause hints at the 'state of discipline and trial' rejected in the first Essay, but later adopted. 15 The theological chapters are unrepresentative in another respect. It is reported that as early as 1796 Malthus rejected, in opposition to Paley, the criterion of happiness in terms of population size; increasing population - clearly a reflection of good living standards - was the objective (see below, section VI).

930 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

than in the theological chapters - he had recommended delay of marriage despite the 'vicious' consequences.16 IV

MORAL RESTRAINT AND UTILITARIANISM

Far from the theological concerns of Mai thus diminishing between the first and second editions, the introduction of moral restraint evidently constitutes an attempt to reinforce the theological defence. Allusions to the training of 'mind' and character - the substance of the expunged theological chapters - re-emerge in 1803 in Book IV, on the obligation to practise the 'virtue' of moral restraint; various beneficial social effects to be expected therefrom; possible objections; and warnings against its avoidance. But the emphasis on preparation for the next world is lacking, and there other major differences between the two versions; Malthus, in 1803 and thereafter, effectively pulled the theological carpet from under his own feet. The first chapter of Book IV sets out the issue by focusing on that proposition of 1798 implying a trade-off of vice against misery (1798/1986, /, 35; see above, p. 883). This idea will admit of being pursued further' (1803/1986, 5, 465). As noted earlier, this proposition does not appear in the original theological chapters, which contain no hint of a trade-off (above, p. 925). Malthus evidently realized that those chapters had to be recast. That some sort of check is inevitable is represented, as in 1798, as a 'law of nature.' But the theological emphasis is now upon the avoidance of excess population growth 'with the least possible prejudice to the virtue and happiness of human society'; it is no longer to explain (and justify) 'the constant pressure of distress,' but rather to explain (and justify) the necessity for checks and, at one remove, the source of that necessity, namely, sexual passion — represented against Godwin to be the 'most powerful and general of our desires' after that for food (468). Alternatively stated, Malthus qua theologian set himself the task in 1803 of accounting for the Deity's creation of man as a being driven by a desire that necessitates (painful) control, displacing the emphasis entirely from a disheartening outcome of the population principle defined in terms of actual poverty. We turn to the details of the argument regarding sexual passion - and the consequent 'tendency' for population growth to exceed that of food. This passion is represented (much as in the 1798 theological chapters) as necessary to the Divine purposes of assuring: (i) the 'replenishing' of the earth; and (2) 'the formation and improvement of the human mind' by 16 There are, it is true, strong statements in 1798: 'Necessity, that imperious all-pervading law of nature,' was such that 'the race of man cannot, by any efforts of reason, escape from it' (1986, /, 9). But since the necessary consequences of the law of nature is said to be misery and vice, there is the implication even here of a trade-off. The bleak statement may perhaps be explained as a reflection of the 'growth-of-mind' theodicy, which required the spur of necessity (see Harvey-Phillips, 1984, 596; Waterman, 1991, 108).

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 931

counteracting 'indolence.' The potential for 'evil' resulting from generator uniform laws is also allowed - an allusion to excess population growth in conditions of land scarcity. But there is this major difference between 1803 and the 1798 theological chapters - a new, very positive solution to the problem of poverty: 'It is however, a law, exactly similar in its great features to all the other laws of nature. It is strong and general, and apparently would not admit of any very considerable diminution, without being inadequate to its object; the evils arising from it are incidental to those necessary qualities of strength and generality; and these evils are capable of being very greatly mitigated and rendered comparatively light by human energy and virtue. We cannot but conceive that it is an object of the Creator, that the earth should be replenished [at least to a considerable degree];17 and it appears to me clear, that this could not be effected without a tendency in population to increase faster than food; and as, with the present law of increase, the peopling of the earth does not proceed very rapidly, we have undoubtedly some reason to believe, that this law is not too powerful for its apparent object... [We] have reason to think that it is more conducive to the formation and improvement of the human mind, that the law should be uniform, and the evils incidental to it, under certain circumstances, be left to be mitigated or removed by man himself. His duties in this case vary with his situation; he is thus kept more alive to the consequences of his actions; and his faculties have evidently greater play and opportunity of improvement, than if the evil were removed by a perpetual change of the law according to circumstances' (471-2). That misery was avoidable, and this without corresponding increase in vice, is thus the central theological theme of 1803, and often repeated: '[If], in addition to that general activity and direction of our industry put in motion by these laws [of nature], we further consider that the incidental evils arising from them are constantly directing our attention to the proper check to population, moral restraint; and if it appear that, by a strict obedience to the duties pointed out to us by the light of nature and reason, and confirmed and sanctioned by revelation, these evils may be avoided, the objection will, I trust, be removed, and all apparent imputation on the goodness of the Deity be done away' (474). 'As it appears therefore, that it is in the power of each individual to avoid all the evil consequences to himself and society resulting from the principle of population, by the practice of a virtue clearly dictated to him by the light of nature, and expressly enjoined in revealed religion; and as we have reason to think, that the exercise of this virtue to a certain degree would tend rather to increase than diminish individual happiness; we can have no reason to impeach the justice of the Deity, because his general laws make this virtue necessary, and punish our offenses against it by the evils atten-

17 The qualification in parenthesis was deleted in the 1806 edition (II, 315).

932 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE dant upon vice, and the pains that accompany the various forms of premature death' (480). On this view, natural and moral evil, including poverty, could be appreciated as the avoidable consequence of inadequate selfcontrol - with an eye always to the balance of happiness: 'Natural and moral evil seem to be the instruments employed by the Deity in admonishing us to avoid any mode of conduct which is not suited to our being, and will consequently injure our happiness ... [If] we heed not this admonition, we justly incur the penalty of our disobedience, and our sufferings operate as a warning to others' (465-6).

Malthus's defence of the Deity is intimately bound up with the notion of utility as the foundation of morals.18 The utilitarian rule is stated thus by Mai thus: As animals, or till we know their consequences, our only business is to follow these dictates of nature; but, as reasonable beings, we are under the strongest obligations to attend to their consequences; and if they be evil to ourselves or others, we may justly consider it as an indication, that such a mode of indulging these passions is not suited to our state or conformable to the will of God. As moral agents, therefore, it is clearly our duty to restrain their indulgence in these particular directions; and by thus carefully examining the consequences of our natural passions, and frequently bringing them to the test of utility, gradually to acquire a habit of gratifying them only in that way, which, being unattended with evil, will clearly add to the sum of human happiness and fulfil the apparent purpose of the Creator. Though utility, therefore, can never be the immediate excitement to the gratification of any passion, it is the test by which alone we can know [1817: independently of the revealed will of God], whether it ought or ought not to be indulged; and is therefore the surest foundation of all morality [1817: the surest criterion of moral rules] which can be collected from the light of nature. All the moral codes, which have inculcated the subjection of the passions to reason,

18 Paley's Moral and Political Philosophy is cited in support: 'The method of coming at the will of God, concerning any action, by the light of nature, is to enquire into the tendency of the action to promote or diminish the general happiness. And this rule proceeds upon the presumption, that God Almighty wills and wishes the happiness of his creatures; and consequently, that those actions, which promote that will and wish, must be agreeable to him; and the contrary' (1785, 56-7). This perspective, Malthus observed, implied that the Christian religion was adaptable 'to a more improved state of human society,' in so far as 'it places our duties respecting marriage and the procreation of children in a different light from that in which they were before beheld' (1803/1986, 3, 479)-

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 933 have been, as I conceive, really built upon this foundation, whether the promulgators of them were aware of it or not. (531; 1817, III, 214-15)'9

There is, however, a crucial difference between Malthus and Paley to keep in mind. For Malthus, the utilitarian rule pointed to moral restraint: There are perhaps few actions that tend so directly to diminish the general happiness, as to marry without the means of supporting children. He who commits this act, therefore, clearly offends against the will of God; and having become a burden on the society in which he lives, and plunged himself and family into a situation, in which virtuous habits are preserved with more difficulty than in any other, he appears to have violated his duty to his neighbours and to himself, and thus to have listened to the voice of passion in opposition to his higher obligations' (479-80). 'Judging merely from the light of nature, if we feel convinced of the misery arising from a redundant population on the one hand, and of the evils and unhappiness, particularly to the female sex, arising from promiscuous intercourse, on the other, I do not see how it is possible for any person who acknowledges the principle of utility as the great foundation of morals [1817: the great criterion of moral rules], to escape the conclusion, that moral restraint, till we are in a condition to support a family, is the strict line of duty; and when revelation is taken into the question, this duty undoubtedly receives very powerful confirmation' (482; 1817, III, 102-3).20 But this was not the conclusion reached by Paley (1785, 592-3), who, to Malthus's distress - somewhat exaggerated, since in fact Paley assumed the limits to be nowhere in sight (see note 37, below) —recommended state encouragement of population expansion in conditions of increasing land scarcity: The particular end in view in this case appears to be absolutely criminal. We wish to force people into marriage, when from the acknowledged scarcity of subsistence they will have little chance of being able to support their children. We might as well force people into the water who are unable to swim. In both cases we rashly tempt providence. Nor have we more reason to believe that a miracle will be worked to save us from the misery and mortality resulting from our conduct in the one case than in the other' (485). Malthus also drew on Paley's later work, Natural Theology (1803 [1802], 19 James, (1979, 119-20), points out that a correspondent in the Christian Observer for September 1805 ('Unus,' possibly Thomas Gisborne) objected to the principle of Expediency enunciated in this passage (as well as to the reason given - involving consequences - for defining an action as vicious, below, p. 940). The modifications to the text of 1817 may have been made by Malthus in response to this criticism, as suggested by James, though James erred in dating the modification 1806. 20 The notion that the source of morality resides in social utility is applied also to the case of private charity in a warning against the exercise of 'indiscriminate' benevolence. For benevolence and sex are both 'natural passions, which are excited by their appropriate objects, and to the gratification of which we are prompted by the pleasurable sensations which accompany them' (531).

934 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

344) >21 in championing from the utilitarian perspective the regulation not the extinction - of the passions: 'Our virtue ... as reasonable beings, evidently consists in educing from the general materials, which the Creator has placed under our guidance, the greatest sum of human happiness; and as all our the natural impulses are abstractly considered good, and only to be distinguished by their consequences, a strict attention to these consequences, and the regulation of our conduct conformably to them, must be considered as our principal duty' (1803/1986, 3, 471). It is precisely because the passions 'could not be generally weakened or diminished, without injuring our happiness' that their control rather than their extinction was required (467). In this context too we find utility represented as the source of morality (and law) in the course of an analogy drawn with hunger: 'The act of the hungry man who satisfies his appetite by taking a loaf from the shelf of another, is in no respect to be distinguished from the act of him who does the same thing with a loaf of his own, but by its consequences. From the consideration of these consequences, we feel the most perfect conviction, that, if people were not prevented from gratifying their natural desires with the loaves in the possession of others, that the number of loaves would universally diminish. This experience is the foundation of the laws relating to property, and of the distinctions of virtue and vice, in the gratification of desires otherwise perfectly the same. If the pleasure arising from the gratification of these propensities were universally diminished in vividness, violations of property would become less frequent; but this advantage would be greatly overbalanced by the narrowing of the sources of enjoyment. The diminution in the quantity of all those productions, which contribute to human gratification, would be much greater in proportion than the diminution of thefts; and the loss of general happiness on the one side would be beyond comparison greater than the gain to happiness on the other' (467-8). This same concept of a net balance of happiness is generalized to sex and all the passions: 'Few or none of them will admit of being greatly diminished, without narrowing the sources of good, more powerfully than the sources of evil. And the reason seems to be obvious. They are, in fact, the materials of all our pleasures, as well as of all our pains; of all our happiness, as well as of all our misery; of all our virtues, as well as of all our vices. It must therefore be regulation and direction that are wanted, not diminution or extinction' (470). As for sexual passion, Malthus goes out of his way to list the sources of positive happiness flowing therefrom when 'taken in an enlarged sense' (468) .22 Thus 'the formation and steady pursuit of some plan of life in21 My references to this work will be to the American edition of 1803. The original appeared in 1802, and this is important, since the 'moral restraint' of Malthus's second edition, it has been argued, depends on it (Waterman, 1991, 147-8; see above, p. 926). 22 Here again (see above, p. 930) his target is Godwin, who played down the 'attendant circumstances' attached to physical sex.

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 935

volving the prospect of companionship and children is represented as 'one of the most permanent sources of happiness' (469); the 'bond of conjugal affection' had a 'most powerful tendency to soften and meliorate the human character, and keep it more alive to all the kindlier emotions of benevolence and pity'; and, furthermore, when the passion faces 'obstacles ... in the way of very early and universal gratification,' there is a resultant positive effect on 'gentleness, kindness, and suavity of manners,' that is, on 'the formation and improvement of character' (469-70). All in all, though some evil results from the passion between the sexes - or rather from its 'irregular gratification' - on a balance of considerations, the net advantage was overwhelming. Adding in the widespread practice of moral restraint, the outlook becomes bright indeed, both from the perspective of living standards and from that of 'the female character': If, for the sake of illustration, we might be permitted to draw a picture of society, in which each individual endeavoured to attain happiness by the strict fulfilment of those duties, which the most enlightened of the ancient philosophers deduced from the laws of nature, and which have been directly taught, and received such powerful sanctions in the moral code of Christianity, it would present a very different scene from that which we now contemplate. Every act, which was prompted by the desire of immediate gratification, but which threatened an ultimate overbalance of pain, would be considered as a breach of duty; and consequently no man, whose earnings were only sufficient to maintain two children, would put himself in a situation in which he might have to maintain four or five, however he might be prompted to it by the passion of love ... The interval between the age of puberty and the period at which each individual might venture on marriage must, according to the supposition, be passed in strict chastity; because the law of chastity cannot be violated without producing evil. The effect of anything like a promiscuous intercourse, which prevents the birth of children, is evidently to weaken the best affections of the heart, and in a very marked manner to degrade the female character. And any other intercourse would, without improper arts, bring as many children into the society as marriage, with a much greater probability of their becoming a burden to it. (474-5) Sexual continence before marriage was thus the ideal, and this because promiscuity produced evil, including a weakening of 'affection' and a degradation of 'the female character.' This would be so, assuming the practice of birth control or 'improper arts' - though in its absence there would be the same problems, and worse, which flow from early marriage and poverty. As expressed a little later, 'moral restraint' was 'the strict line of duty,' since promiscuity generated 'evils and unhappiness, particularly to the female sex' (482), that is, some form or other of character degeneration, and probably also sexually transmitted diseases. This is further confirmed by various amplifications regarding 'the vice of promiscuous inter-

936 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

course' resulting from mere prudence, which includes both 'moral' and 'physical' evils (495; see chapter 18, pp. 888-9).

The formal defence of the Deity in 1803 thus extends far beyond 1798. But there is reason to doubt whether Malthus continued to draw upon the original theological chapters of 1798 in defining his brand of utilitarianism. For one thing, it is characteristic of the later editions that training of the mind for the 'future state' or 'state of superior enjoyment,' though mentioned, does not receive anything like the same attention it is accorded in 1798; while the source of virtue in a calculation of consequences is said to be common to 'heathen' as well as Christian moralists: 'The difficulty of moral restraint will perhaps be objected to this doctrine. To him who does not acknowledge the authority of the Christian religion, I have only to say that, after the more careful investigation, this virtue appears to be absolutely necessary, in order to avoid certain evils which would otherwise result from the general laws of nature. According to his own principles, it is his duty to pursue the greatest good consistent with these laws; and not to fail in this important end, and produce an overbalance of misery by a partial obedience to some of the dictates of nature, while he neglects others. The path of virtue, though it be the only path which leads to permanent happiness, has always been represented by the heathen moralists as of difficult ascent' (477-8). Appeal to the Scriptures regarding the nature of the individual's 'duty' is secondary to the main argument for pre-marital continence - the net balance of social good (including moral tone or character) resulting therefrom.23 At the same time it would be misleading to pretend that Mai thus's utilitarianism as applied to moral restraint is wholly plain sailing. An explanatory note attached to the term 'moral restraint' in 1806 suggests appeal to some absolute code: 'It will be observed, that I here use the term moral in its most confined sense. By moral restraint I would be understood to mean a restraint from marriage, from prudential motives, with a conduct strictly moral during the period of this restraint; and I have never intentionally deviated from this sense. When I have wished to consider the restraint from marriage unconnected with its consequences, I have either called it prudential restraint, or a part of the preventive check, of which indeed it forms the principal branch' (1806, I, ig-aon).24 As Sir Leslie 23 A view of happiness which includes character or moral tone does not, of course, of itself necessarily imply a 'theological' perspective. 24 Bonar, however, sees no problem here: 'The adjective "moral" does not imply that the motives are the highest possible. The adjective is applied not so much to the motive of the action as to the action itself, from whatever motives proceeding; and in the mouth of a Utilitarian this language is not unphilosophical. Moral restraint, in the pages of

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 937

Stephen observed, the term 'vice' is occasionally used in the Essay not as 'productive' of misery, but as 'an alternative to misery; and yet something bad in itself. Is this consistent with [Malthus's] Utilitarianism?' (1900, II, 158)-25 This problem is best approached directly by reference to Malthus's unwillingness to categorize illicit sex as 'misery' rather than 'vice.' 'Misery' was an inappropriate term for actions which in individual cases generated a balance even of long-run happiness (with an eye to this, not the next, life in contrast to the perspective of 1798). The 'viciousness' of promiscuity was defined relative to its 'general tendency to reduce individual happiness, and thus the happiness of society: 'As the general consequence of vice is misery, and as this consequence is the precise reason why an action is termed vicious, it may appear that the term misery alone would be here sufficient, and that it is superfluous to use both. But the rejection of the term vice would introduce a considerable confusion into our language and ideas. We want it particularly to distinguish that class of action, the general tendency of which is to produce misery, but which, in their immediate or individual effects, may produce perhaps exactly the contrary. The gratification of all our passions in its immediate effect is happiness, not misery; and, in individual instances, even the remote consequences (at least in this life) come under the same denomination. I have little doubt that there have been some irregular connexions with women, which have added to the happiness of both parties, and have injured no one. These individual actions, therefore, cannot come under the head of misery. But they are still evidently vicious, because an action is so denominated, the general tendency of which is to produce misery, whatever may be its individual effect; and no person can doubt the general tendency of an illicit intercourse between the sexes, to injure the happiness of society' (1803/1986, 2, iS-ivn).26 Malthus failed to make explicit that no stigma attaches to the behaviour of individual couples engaged in 'irregular connexions' where a net balance of happiness could be expected for that couple without injury to

Malthus, means simply continence; it is an abstinence from marriage followed by no irregularities' (1924, 53). 25 Thus certain 'viscious' practices of the South Sea Islanders result in a lesser need for other population checks (famine) and are pleasurable per se and ought, on a neutral view, be considered beneficial; and the rejection of birth control, which would limit population without causing 'misery,' seems not to be consistent. Malthus, Stephen opines, 'wishes to avoid the imputation of sanctioning such practices, and therefore condemns them by his moral check; but it would be hard to prove that he was consistent in condemning them.' 26 Although Malthus neglected in the foregoing passage to define the 'injury' to the 'happiness of society,' he presumably intended character degeneration and disease (as in other contexts discussed above), since increased poverty cannot be the issue.

938 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

other parties.27 And the fact is that he stepped back from that conclusion. For in 1817 he altered the third sentence justifying the term 'vice' to read: 'We want it particularly to distinguish those actions, the general tendency of which is to produce misery, and which are therefore prohibited by the commands of the Creator, and the precepts of the moralist, although, in their immediate or individual effects, they may produce perhaps exactly the contrary' (1817, I, 23~4n). Here then we find an appeal to biblical injunction. Similarly: 'There are perhaps few actions that tend so directly to diminish the general happiness, as to marry without the means of supporting children. He who commits this act, therefore, clearly offends against the will of God ...' (above, p. 993). However, it is noteworthy that such injunctions are not represented as independent; rather, the Creator condemns certain acts because they tend to generate net social disutility. This perspective is implicit in Paley's dictum, approved by Malthus, that the 'method of coming at the will of God ... by the light of nature, is to enquire into the tendency of the action to promote or diminish the general happiness' (see above, note 18). To this extent dogma and utility can proceed hand in hand, and Stephen's problem is avoided.28 In other contexts, too, this gloss seems to be intended, as in the reference to 'a strict obedience to the duties pointed out to us by the light of nature and reason, and confirmed and sanctioned by revelation,' or to 'the practice of a virtue clearly dictated ... by the light of nature, and expressly enjoined in revealed religion' (cited above, p. 931). And we find the proposition that those private acts 'the general tendency of which is to produce misery' are to be classed as vicious, deliberately altered in 1817 to incorporate this perspective: 'An action is so denominated, which violates an express precept, founded upon its general tendency to produce misery' (24n).29

27 Contrast this with the statement of 1799, cited above, p. 929. That statement, dealing with a refusal to legitimize war, creates a problem from a strictly utilitarian viewpoint; one could envisage circumstances in which war might be justified as an alternative to poverty (see Rashid, 1984, 137-8). 28 Even in those cases where the command of God seems to be given independent status, it would not do to exaggerate the problem. Bentham, after all, represented the ultimate task of government to be the encouragement of socially desirable behaviour with conspicuous allowance made for 'men's moral, religious, sympathetic, and anti-pathetic sensibilities' (1789, 68). And J.S. Mill defended Paley along these lines against a charge by Sedgwick: 'To say that if we adopt the principle of utility, we cannot admit religion as a sanction for it, or cannot attach importance to religious motives or feelings [is] simply false' (1835/1969, X, 69). 29 That Malthus was, however, troubled by the general issue seems to be implied by the changes in terminology referred to above, p. 932, specifically the replacement in 1817 of the term 'foundation of all morality' by 'criterion of moral rules' in the representation of utility, and the insertion of the qualification 'independently of the revealed will of God.'

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 939 V

PRUDENTIAL CONTROL AND UTILITARIANISM

As we emphasized in chapter 18: V, Mai thus did not believe that the premarital period could be spent chastely. Yet the small likelihood of any extensive adoption of the ideal solution ('moral restraint'), Malthus insisted, did not detract from the theological defence of the Deity: 'He who publishes a moral code, or system of duties, however firmly he may be convinced of the strong obligation on each individual strictly to conform to it, has never the folly to imagine that it will be universally or even generally practised ... I allowed myself to suppose the universal prevalence of this virtue.,, hat i might endeavour to remove any imputatio on the goodness of the Deity, by showing, that the evils arising from the principle of population were exactly of the same nature as the generality of other evils which excite fewer complaints; that they were increased by human ignorance and indolence, and diminished by human knowledge and virtue; and on the supposition that each individual strictly fulfilled his duty, would be almost totally removed; and this without any general diminution of those sources of pleasure, arising from the regulated indulgence of the passions, which have been justly considered as the principal ingredients of human happiness' (1803/1986, 3, 482-3). In the Appendix of 1817, Malthus insisted again that he was doing his duty by introducing the ideal solution, 'whether the remedy be ... adequate or inadequate' (see below, note 32). Here it is illuminating to consider a charge by Robert Torrens (1815, viii-x) against Malthus of a blatant inconsistency in introducing moral restraint, despite his criticisms of Godwin and Condorcet. This criticism is, in one major respect, unjustified. Torrens failed to note Mai thus's own defence in 1803 against such complaints - that his position differed in principle from that of the idealists by its emphasis on self-interest (subject to appropriate institutions) rather than on benevolence: 'It is not required of us to act from motives to which we are unaccustomed; to pursue a general good, which we may not distinctly comprehend, or the effect of which may be weakened by distance and diffusion. The happiness of the whole is to be the result of the happiness of individuals, and to begin first with them. No co-operation is required. Every step tells. He who performs his duty faithfully will reap the full fruits of it, whatever may be the number of others who fail. This duty is express, and intelligible to the humblest capacity. It is merely, that he is not to bring beings into the world, for whom he cannot find the means of support' (1803/1986, J, 483). Malthus could, however, be held to account had he proposed a solution to the population problem which he realized would not be widely adopted. He himself admitted as much when he pointed a finger at 'visionary' writers: 'If it will answer any purpose of illustration, I see no harm in drawing the picture of a society, in which each individual is supposed strictly to fulfil his duties; nor does a writer appear to be justly liable to the

940 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

imputation of being visionary, unless he make such universal or general obedience necessary to the practical utility of his system, and to that degree of moderate and partial improvement, which is all that can rationally be expected from the most complete knowledge of our duties.' If, however, people see their self-interest to lie not in moral restraint but in mere 'prudence,' we are left with the practical choice between 'vice,' or premarital sexual activity, with its unwelcome social consequences (see above, pp. 935-6), and 'misery.' Malthus, to his credit, recognized this and, taking the world as it is, carried on to justify prudential population control on effectively neutral utilitarian grounds - notwithstanding that this line clashes with the theological defence of the Deity turning upon ideal behaviour. We have already elaborated on the net balance of social utility deriving from population control with an eye to reality (chapter 18: V),3° a calculus, it will be recalled, taking account of the 'vices' attached to poverty, and including theft and murder - and their punishment envisaged as a 'painful' act or disutility - and the degradation of young persons (490-2) .31 A consequence of excessive population growth is thus an inevitable degradation of character, unless one has recourse to prudential control, albeit involving premarital sex, since the damage (even to character) is thereby lessened (489). It is pertinent, too, that the reduction of the misery attached to poverty is itself defined as a moral problem: 'And, with regard to the necessity of this celibacy in countries that have been long peopled, or our obligation not to marry till we have a fair prospect of being able to support our children it will appear to deserve the attention of the moralist, if it can be proved that an attention to this obligation is of more effect in the prevention of misery, than all the other virtues combined' (473). Similarly: 'Can any man of reflection,' Malthus asked in 1817, 'venture to state that there is no moral reason for repressing the inclination to early marriages; when it cannot be denied that the alternative of not repressing it must necessarily and unavoidably be premature mortality from excessive poverty?' (1817, III, 411). To claim, as Malthus does at one point (see above, p. 937), that illicit intercourse is to be classed as 'vicious' because (viewed as a tendency, not necessarily in individual cases) it injures 'the happiness of society,' loses all substance once it is allowed that such behaviour generates a net balance of social happiness via its reduction of poverty and the vicious consequences of poverty. Malthus went yet further in 1806 by his insistence that he had 'taken man as he is' in arriving at 'practical applications' of his principle

30 The desirable political and military consequences ascribed to the widespread practice of moral restraint would follow from prudential control tout court, and must be included in the utility calculus (chapter 18, pp. 9O5f.). 31 Winch's strictures on the argument of this chapter (1993) would be more convincing had he taken this position into account.

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 941

of population, that his was no visionary concept of man: Thus viewing him and knowing that some checks to populations must exist, I have not the slightest hesitation in saying, that the prudential check to marriage is better than premature mortality' (1806, II, 537-8) .32 Malthus recognized that the elements allowed into the utility calculus is always a matter of personal judgment (1803/1986, 2, iii, cited chapter 18, p. 886) ,33 Doubtless the precise constituents of 'morality' differ somewhat between Malthus and Mill or Bentham (as they do between the latter two).34 But the characteristic theodicy of 1798 - its concept of 'the mighty process for the creation and formation of mind' to fit it for 'happier situation, nearer the presence of the mighty maker' - is played down even within the course of the defence of the Deity; and moreover is wholly irrelevant to the utilitarian calculus adopted in the actual treatment of particular social issues, which eschews the ideal. In fact, we go further. Malthus introduced a purely secular orientation by the two allowances discussed above. First, the concession that, in individual cases, 'irregular' sexual relationships might generate 'happiness' to both parties with injury to nobody (above, p. 937); such behaviour is termed 'vicious' only because of its general tendency to individual, and thus social unhappiness. This is far from a theological perspective, though Malthus struggled to avoid the 32 Malthus, however, insisted that he had done his duty by pointing to the ideal solution 'whether the remedy be ... adequate or inadequate': 'I have not considered the evils of vice and misery arising from a redundant population as unavoidable, and incapable of being diminished. On the contrary I have pointed out a mode by which these evils may be removed or mitigated by removing or mitigating their cause. I have endeavoured to shew that this may be done consistently with human vice and happiness. I have never considered any possible increase of population as evil, except as far as it might increase the proportion of vice and misery. Vice and misery, and these alone, are the evils which it has been my great object to contend against. I have expressly proposed moral restraint as their rational and proper remedy; and whether the remedy be good or bad, adequate or inadequate, the proposal itself, and the stress which I have laid upon it, is an incontrovertible proof that I never can have considered vice and misery as themselves remedies' (1817, III, 391-2). 33 As J.S. Mill was to point out, the greatest happiness principle did not in itself yield rules of just behaviour, especially if allowance is made for the consequences of actions for character, that is, the effects of action 'upon [an individual's] susceptibilities of pleasures or pain, upon the general direction of his thoughts, feelings, and imagination ..." (1835/1969, X, 56). All in all, there was 'as much difference in the moral judgements of different persons, as there is in their views of human nature, and of the formation of character' (67), so that 'clear and comprehensive views of education and human culture must ... precede, and form the basis of, a philosophy of morals' (56). Thus a utilitarian perspective necessarily turns on some conception or other of 'morality' drawn from an external source defining 'right' or 'true human feeling.' This had been Bentham's position as well, and one which Mill had in his early reaction from Bentham originally disputed (cf. Hollander, 1985, 6l7f.). 34 As will also be recalled from chapter 18, VIII, the fact that Malthus's utilitarianism drew on Paley must not cloud their differences on the constituents of the greatest-good formula.

942 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

implication. And yet more important, is the balancing of moral costs and benefits which led Malthus to countenance simple prudence as the lesser evil. This attitude is a direct invitation to abandon entirely the 'ideal' solution posited for the existence of evil.35 Although Malthus had introduced 'moral restraint' in response to critics of the first Essay (above, p. 925), the alteration did not have a mollifying effect, as is clear from the savage criticism to which he was subjected after the second and later editions (e.g., Jarrold, 1806; Hazlitt, 1807; Weyland, 1816; Ravenstone, 1821). This is particularly understandable when we keep in mind Malthus's effective rejection of moral restraint as a practical solution. (See on this issue Levy 1996; also on reactions to the second and later essays, James, 1979, 109-115, 116-26; Waterman, 1991, ch. 4; Bonar, 1924, Book IV.) There are then two theological Malthuses at work, one proposing the ideal solution to the problem of the threat of poverty created by potential population pressure;* and the other taking the world, warts and all, and arriving at a wholly different set of recommendations. In the latter guise, there is nothing to distinguish Malthus from the secular utilitarians. It remains only to note a revealing disclaimer of any right to interfere in the event of an increase in vice with increased prudential control: 'If, on contemplating the increase of vice which might contingently follow an attempt to inculcate the duty of moral restraint, and the increase of misery that must necessarily follow the attempts to encourage marriage and population, we come to the conclusion, not to interfere in any respect, but to leave every man to his own free choice, and responsible only to God for the evil which he does in either way; this is all I contend for; I would on no account do more; but I contend, that at present we are very far from doing this' (1803/1986, 3, 497-8). VI

MORE ON THE DESIRABILITY OF POPULATION EXPANSION

Paley interpreted the 'greatest happiness' rule as implying a case for large numbers: 'The happiness of a people is made up of the happiness of single persons; and the quantity of it can only be augmented by increasing the

35 Our conclusion may be contrasted with that of Eversley, 1959, 248-9: The preventive checks which redvice fertility 'may be divided into good, bad, and indifferent checks. The good one is moral restraint, i.e. restraint from marriage with virtuous conduct, and out of regard for the well-being of society, as well as one's own advantage. The bad one is self-seeking prudential restraint from marriage with loose sexual conduct. The indifferent one is prudential restraint mostly for selfish reasons, with an occasional human lapse presumably permitted.' 36 Malthus often reverted to the ideal. Thus moral restraint is represented in 1824 (and repeated 1830) as 'the only mode of keeping population on a level with the means of subsistence, which is perfectly consistent with virtue and happiness' (1986, 4, 203).

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 943

number of the percipients, or the pleasures of their perceptions' (1785, 587-8) ,37 An early objection by Malthus (along typically Smithian lines) appears in the unprinted pamphlet The Crisis, written in 1796: 'On the subject of population I cannot agree with Archdeacon Paley, who says, that the quantity of happiness in any country is best measured by the number of people. Increasing population is the most certain possible sign of the happiness and prosperity of the state; but the actual population may be only a sign of the happiness that is past' (cited by Empson, 1837, in Semmel, 1963, 244) .38 As we have seen in chapter 18: II, increasing population - not a large population as such - was desirable, although only in so far as such increase implied a response to good standards, and would not dictate reduced standards at higher absolute population sizes.39 In the third edition of 1806, Malthus protested strongly against misrepresentations of his position (1806, II, 507-8). His program of checks to the birth rate was consistent with population expansion, and critics had erroneously supposed his object was to check population, 'as if anything could be more desirable than the most rapid increase of population unaccompanied by vice and misery' (515-16). The consistency of the desiderata of 'high' wages and population growth turns, it will be recalled, on the greater potential for productivity increase in the case of a population with a high proportion

37 Paley in fact wrote in somewhat qualified fashion: 'within certain limits ... it may be affirmed, I think, with certainty, that the quantity of happiness produced in any given district (the object of which all the endeavours of public wisdom should be directed,) 50 far depends upon the number of inhabitants, that, in comparing adjoining periods in the same country, the collective happiness will be nearly in the exact proportion of the numbers, that is, twice the number of inhabitants will produce double the quantity of happiness.' Land scarcity, however, was not a practical issue for Paley: 'The fertility of the ground, in temporate regions, is capable of being improved by cultivation to an extent which is unknown' (590). Bentham was also to qualify his utility-based case for population increase: 'Increase of population is desirable, as being an increase of — i. The beings susceptible of enjoyment, 2. The beings capable of being employed as instruments of defence. It results of course from the encrease of the means of subsistence, and cannot be carried beyond them' (1801-4/1954, HI, 361). 38 Empson reported that Malthus subsequently regarded Paley and Pitt as 'the two converts of whom he was most proud.' For Paley's apparent 'conversion,' see chapter 18, note 35. 39 Malthus's famous statement that, without Poor Laws, 'though there might have been a few more instances of very severe distress, the aggregate mass of happiness among the common people would have been much greater than it is at present' (1803/1986, 3, 368), imples that a smaller population at good average wages is preferable on utility grounds to a larger population at poor average wages. Thus it is not apparent that he countenanced growth of population (and therefore higher population at any time) when accompanied by reduced standards. Bonar's evaluation (1924, 333) therefore goes too far: 'Malthus desired the great numbers as well as the great happiness, and was indeed quite naturally led by his theological views to prefer a little happiness for each of many individuals to a great deal for each of a few.'

944 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

of healthy adults, Malthus expecting that the initial restriction of population growth, by altering the age distribution, would 'create fresh resources, and consequently ... encourage a continued increase of efficient population' under relatively favourable circumstances (550). Mai thus's concern with an expanded population reflects in part the notion that God intended the replenishment of the earth.40 But this must be read with the Malthusian gloss, which deviates radically from the standard religious argument in favour of a high population by way of early marriage and large families: 'I believe that it is the intention of the Creator that the earth should be replenished; but certainly with a healthy, virtuous, and happy population, not an unhealthy, vicious, and miserable one. And if in endeavouring to obey the command to increase and multiply, we people it only with beings of this latter description, and suffer accordingly, we have no right to impeach the justice of the command, but our irrational mode of executing it' (509). But once we allow for a reduced population growth rate with an eye to the living standards of the masses, the door is wide open to justify slow population growth, albeit formally satisfying the biblical injunction, the degree of rapidity to be recommended - and the amount of 'vice' that is acceptable - entirely a matter of circumstance and subjective judgment as to appropriate living standards. As for circumstance we need only take the extreme case to see how far the theological component is diluted. J.S. Mill, unlike Malthus, formally championed stationariness, even when expanding population is not at the cost of reduced wages, on grounds of women's interests (letter dated 8 April 1852; 1972, XIV, 88-9) and amenity (1848/1965, III, 756) ;41 but Malthus did allow in 1817 that, in limiting circumstances, stationariness would be essential (1817, III, 12-13; cited chapter 5, pp. 187-8). Evidently, the absolute magnitude of population corresponding to a stationary state will be lower with than without prudential control, and the injunction to 'replenish' the earth is to that degree lessened; yet notwithstanding this fact, Malthus championed prudence. Since for him (as well as such followers as Thomas Chalmers) population growth in certain conditions was undesirable, we cannot accept the argument for the continued significance of the original theological dimension (above, pp. 917-18).

These themes lead us back to the birth-control issue (see above, p. 935). Allowing 'promiscuity' as an alternative to the misery and the vice of

40 See Pullen, 1981, 42; Spengler, 1960, 379, 385. 41 Mill did, however, recognize the case for a large population relative to that of neighbours from the perspective of defence (755). How far Mill's case for a 'stationary state' was a matter of day-dreaming is discussed in Hollander, 19943.

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 945

poverty, as Malthus did, is inconsistent with a global rejection of mechanical contraception. It is, one deduces, the practice of birth control by married couples that Malthus had largely in mind by his celebrated denunciation of mechanical contraception as 'immoral.' This conclusion is reinforced in 1817 by reference to the disincentive effects supposedly attached to the practice: 'I have never adverted to the check suggested by Condorcet without the most marked disapprobation. Indeed I should always particularly reprobate any artificial and unnatural modes of checking population, both on account of their immorality and their tendency to remove a necessary stimulus to industry. If it were possible for each married couple to limit by a wish the number of Uieir children, there is certainly reason to fear that the indolence of the human race would be very greatly increased; and that neither the population of individual countries, nor of the whole earth, would ever reach its natural and proper extent. But the restraints which I have recommended are quite of a different character. They are not only pointed out by reason and sanctioned by religion, but tend in the most marked manner to stimulate industry. It is not easy to conceive a more powerful encouragement to exertion and good conduct than the looking forward to marriage as a state peculiarly desirable: but only to be enjoyed in comfort, by the acquisition of habits of industry, economy and prudence' (1817, III, 393-4; emphasis added).42 It is clear that Malthus continued to reason as if die child-bearing decision is, and should be, entailed by the marriage decision, and this in part on grounds of 'morality' in some absolute sense, independently of the social consequences. There were, therefore, limits to his reformist utilitarian perspective. Yet the logic of his own allowances pointed directly to the obvious conclusion - that drawn by the Philosophical Radicals; for once it is allowed: (i) that 'vice' can be justified on a utilitarian balance; and (2) that there are circumstances where even stationariness of population is required, it is impossible to rule out generalized birth control as one means to achieve the end, especially since - as Francis Place pointed out - birth control would permit both early marriage and good standards, and a reduction in prostitution (Place, 1822/1930, 176-7).43 Social utility would then dictate such practices by married couples, as (Malthus himself allowed) it did for the unmarried.

42 Cf. the earlier proposition that the desire for marriage and procreation acts as stimulus to effort (chapter 18, p. 881). On this 'paradox' in the context of Malthus's optimistic theology, see Pullen, 1981, 51-2; Grampp, 1974, 298; Winch, 1993, 250. 43 Place acknowledged the connection with Malthus and gave him a sympathetic reading: 'Mr. Malthus seems to shrink from discussing the propriety of preventing conception, not so much it may be supposed from the abhorrence which he or any reasonable man can have to the practice, as from the possible fear of encountering the prejudices of others ...' (173).

946 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE VII

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

We have confirmed that the theological chapters of 1798 are - as Lord Robbins insisted - extraneous to policy. This is so even in the first edition, and a fortiori so in later editions. That these chapters proved an embarrassment is in fact apparent from the Senior-Mai thus correspondence of 1829. As we saw in chapter 18, p. 915, Malthus rejected Senior's original attribution to him of the view that reform was to no purpose; he had intended only to convey that the solution to low wages, or the permanent maintenance of improved wages, lay in population control, since 'population was always ready, and inclined, to increase faster than food, if the checks which repressed it were removed' - whereupon Senior pointed out that 'many, perhaps the majority of your readers, adopt the proposition without the qualification,' believing 'that the expansive power of population is a source of evil incapable not only of being subdued, but even of being mitigated.' Writing two chapters expressly designed to 'vindicate the ways of God to Man,' having in mind the 'constant pressure of distress' could only have misled readers in just the manner Senior complained of. In sum: The theological chapters worked on a presumption of actual population pressure, whereas Malthus had in mind elsewhere in his first edition, and throughout the later editions, potential population pressure. There is a further issue not taken up formally in this chapter but of high relevance - the fact that comparison of the 1798 and later editions reveals a completely changed 'vision' of the population problem (see chapter 16). The empirical issue originally, as far as concerns contemporary Britain, was a supposedly low population growth rate accounted for proximately by low wages, in turn attributable to sluggish agricultural progress.44 In 1803 and thereafter, the picture was transformed in the light of information revealed by the censuses of 1801, 1811, and 1821. Now the problem was to explain accelerating population growth at steady (and even rising) real wages. The explanation offered turned on reductions in mortality rates - not increases in marriage and birth rates — in conditions of, and in part attributable to, rapid growth of national income and capital accumulation. The 'vision' was a bright not a dismal one, for 'the evils resulting from the principle of population have rather diminished than increased, even under the disadvantage of an almost total ignorance of their real cause' (1803/1986, 3, 575) ,45 The original theological problem had thus been entirely superannuated by events; and the revised 44 This, it will be recalled from chapter 1, pp. 38-9, 41-2, by no means reflects unimpressive technology but the diversion of resources from agriculture under pressure of high luxury consumption and government interference. 45 Even in 1798, the empirical problem in Britain is not represented as one of excess population growth. Rather, low real wages reflected remediable impediments to agricultural growth. Strictly, then, the theological chapters were unnecessary, even in 1798.

UTILITARIANISM IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT 947

theological problem of the need for the 'painful' check of chastity before marriage was merely theoretical, considering the ongoing acceleration of national product, or, at worst, a problem for some distant future. The empirical dimension alone would account for the removal of the theological chapters. But there may be other reasons, including the abandonment of the theodicy there outlined, reflected in the contrast between God's grand spiritual end or purpose of 1798 extending beyond this world, and thus assuring an overwhelming net balance of good, and the mundane ends of material existence - namely, the replenishment of the earth and the cultivation of the soil (Harvey-Phillips, 1984, 603).46 Our study has also confirmed that, in so far as concerns actual demographic policy in the Essay on Population, Malthus effectively eschewed theological considerations. His utilitarianism in these contexts is almost entirely earthbound. Rashid, too, maintains that Malthus changed to Paley's view of life as a 'state of trial'; and he attempts to rationalize the adoption thus: 'As the inescapably sombre implications of his population theory sank into his daily thought, Malthus felt increasingly more comfortable with a theology that emphasized life on earth as a state of trial; for according to Malthus's early beliefs 'there was no penalty in the hereafter for failing to improve oneself. One simply returned to dust. Orthodoxy, on the other hand, promised positive pain to those who failed to adhere; as such, orthodoxy provided more incentive to accept the moral restraint ... [It] was Malthus the utilitarian population theorist that determined the beliefs of Malthus the theologian' (1984, 138). For my part, I dispute the notion of 'inescapably sombre implications' flowing from the population theory - the evidence is to the contrary. Malthus may have changed his theological view, but Rashid's rationalization is not convincing.47 As for the continued defence of the Deity in 1803 and thereafter, we have shown how, to the extent he based himself on ideal behaviour involving abstinence before marriage, Malthus the pure theologian clashes with Malthus the theologian-social scientist, taking account of actual human behaviour. In may be said that the two perspectives might be reconciled by an education program inculcating the desirability of moral restraint. But this is not Malthus's approach. Education for him was to convey the significance of prudential population control; there is no emphasis upon the inculcation, via a state-funded program, of the obligation of single people to practise continence on 'moral' grounds, except in so far as such behaviour is favourable to individual, and therefore (it is implied) social 46 This 'mundane' perspective Harvey-Phillips represents as Paley's view. This is fair enough, for Paley seems to aver to a balance of happiness in this world (cf. 1785, Book II, ch. V: 'The Divine Benevolence'). Yet we must not forget that, for Paley, moral behaviour allows for fear of punishment and hope of reward after death (above, section II). 47 For further evidence pointing to this conclusion, see Pullen, I987b.

948 TRADE POLICY AND SOCIAL WELFARE

utility. To the extent that premarital sexual activity could be shown to generate a lesser net balance of social unhappiness than poverty, he tolerated such activity - and this on moral grounds. Our analysis points to the proximity in practice between Malthus and J.S. Mill in their applications of the utilitarian rule. There are certainly differences of detail, but so too are there differences between Malthus and Paley. As social reformers Malthus and Mill stand side by side. In fact they are close to an extraordinary degree. Thus Malthus's insistence, in the light of increasing land scarcity, on a deceleration of population growth with an eye to the maintenance of real wages points the way to the notion, usually identified with Mill, of stationariness at high standards, and this despite formal obeisance to the biblical injunction regarding population expansion. The one area where Malthus lags behind Mill is that of birth control by married couples — though Mill, too, was hesitant to make his position public in the Principles — and here it is, we have found, that a certain inconsistency emerges. There is also the problem that Malthus did not adequately attend to the social implications of irresponsible private behaviour. But all in all, the perspective on utilitarianism for Malthus as well as Mill reflects hostility to the upper-class, military, and Church ideology that rejected population control. That Malthus, unlike Mill, presumed the likely permanence of a class-based society is less significant than it appears at first glance, since his case was not based on natural law or any such appeal, but on a utilitarian calculus of the greatest happiness order, with labour's interests rated highest. Similarly, their respective attitudes to communism turn on this sort of calculation. And, as we have also seen, Malthus, like Mill and against Paley, argued strongly for greater equality.48

48 Mill's hostile comments on Paley's use of the utility rule in defence of 'accredited doctrines' is pertinent here (1852/1969, X.173).

CONCLUSION

I

INTRODUCTION

Reactions to Malthus's procedures were reviewed at the outset of this investigation. They range across the spectrum, from the attribution to him of a peculiarly inductive method to the discernment of the typically deductive procedures of the Ricardians - even extending to the charge by Horner that he practised what later came to be designated the 'Ricardian Vice.' This Conclusion draws on the foregoing chapters to provide a summary statement of Malthusian method. We establish first (section II) Malthus's own strong formal case for deductive theory; we also review his actual practice, involving a predilection for long-run equilibrium analysis which extends beyond value and growth theory to 'sustainable growth' and stabilization. Yet, despite the common ground with Ricardo, the main target in the Principles was Ricardo: 'It has been my wish to avoid giving to my work a controversial air. Yet to free it entirely from controversy, while one of my professed objects is to discuss controverted opinions, and to try their truth by a reference to an enlarged experience, is obviously not possible. There is one modern work, in particular, of very high reputation, some of the fundamental principles of which have appeared to me, after the most mature deliberation, to be erroneous; and I should not have done justice to the ability with which it is written, to the high authority of the writer, and the interests of the science of which it treats, if it had not specifically engaged a considerable portion of my attention. I allude to Mr. Ricardo's work, On the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation (1820, 22-3; 1836, 18). Section III spells out the formal critique of Ricardian theory, the complaint against exessively simplified models and inappropriate applica-

950 CONCLUSION

tion, but certainly not against deductive theory as such. We then show in section IV that there are lesser-known charges of irresponsibility that Malthus addressed against Adam Smith, culminating in a harsh rationalization of Smith's extreme application of corn-pricing analysis to the corn export subsidy, effectively charging Smith with the practice of the 'Ricardian Vice.' Malthus was sometimes as critical of the Physiocrats as he was of Ricardo, but the fact is that he played the same game. Indeed, it seems fair to say that, till late in the day, he was entrapped by the physiocratic surplus concept (the superior productivity of agriculture). This theoretical perspective Malthus reinforced by his application of the Law of Markets to corn via the population mechanism, thereby fixing its price and the corn wage - an application entailing long-term analysis with a vengeance. All his objections to Smith regarding this dimension to his corn-price analysis can be turned against Malthus himself. Malthus's perspectives on theory confirmation and on the general purpose of theory are considered in section V. Again similarities with Ricardo's position come to light. The sense of Malthus's 'doctrine of proportions,' and of his famous representation of political economy as more like morals and politics than mathematics, are taken up together in section VI. These perspectives are shown to concern 'uncertainties' that must be taken into account by policy makers - uncertainties flowing predominantly from Malthus's complex macro-economic position - which disallow general or universally applicable policy directives. But this by no means implies a rejection of deductive theorizing or, indeed, a denial of the potential for the use of mathematics in analysis. Section VII addresses the familiar complaint against Malthus of 'inconsistency.' It is true enough that Malthus failed to develop a full-fledged 'system.' But this was the ideal, and he was aware of the deficiency. The most conspicuous and serious instances of inconsistency we have encountered are the simultaneous adoption of the scarcity and surplus perspectives; Malthus was caught in a theoretical trap imposed by his subscription to 'physiocratic' doctrine. There is also the related clash between the notion of Say's Law applied to food - the proportionate response of population to increases of food - which implies a constant corn wage, and the representation of the wage as policy parameter. Yet apart from these instances - serious though they are - the charges against him when looked at with the specifics of each case at hand have been overdone. Unfortunately, he left himself wide open for misunderstanding because of his love of paradox, argument, and provocation, as well as a certain carelessness in the use of terms, all beautifully demonstrated by Grampp (1974) and amply confirmed in this study. This leads me to an issue never far from the surface in Malthus criticism - his intellectual candour. The story in section VIII, which attempts to account for the general impression of a profound chasm between Ricardian

CONCLUSION 951

and Malthusian procedures, is one, in part, of Malthus's 'misrepresentation' of the Ricardian position. There is, though, no necessity to have recourse to the charge of intellectual dishonesty, since he did not disguise those misrepresentations from Ricardo himself. But I do find it troublesome that he failed to appreciate Ricardian method - though in the end he did come to correct some of the misinterpretation; and I am unable to account for the fact that Malthus seemed to be unaware that he himself was 'guilty' of many of the failings of method and substantive doctrine he attributed to others. His criticisms of Adam Smith can often be turned against himself; and much the same applies to those addressed at Ricardo, most specifically the long-run orientation. I provide a final summing-up in section IX, and here return to the Keynes-Malthus relation. II

MALTHUS'S POSITIVE CASE FOR DEDUCTIVE THEORY AND HIS PRACTICE

We shall now establish Malthus's own strong case for theory appearing in the Essay of 1803 and all later editions in the chapter 'Of the necessity of general principles on this subject.' It must have been overlooked by those who believe Malthus neglected to state his methodological principles (cf. Blaug, 1980, 56), or who insist on Malthus as 'inductivist': It has been observed by Hume, that of all sciences there is none where first appearances are more deceitful than in politics [1752/1955, 3-4]. The remark is undoubtedly very just, and is most peculiarly applicable to that department of the science, which relates to the modes of improving the condition of the lower classes of society. We are continually hearing declamation against theory and theorists, by men who pride themselves upon the distinction of being practical. It must be acknowledged that bad theories are very bad things, and the authors of them useless and sometimes pernicious members of society. But these advocates of practice do not seem to be aware that they themselves very often come under this description, and that a great part of them may be classed among the most mischievous theorists of their time. When a man faithfully relates any facts, which have come within the scope of his own observations, however confined it may have been, he undoubtedly adds to the sum of general knowledge, and confers a benefit on society. But when from this confined experience, from the management of his own little farm, or the details of the workhouse in his neighbourhood, he draws a general inference, as is frequently the case, he then at once erects himself into a theorist; and is the more dangerous, because, experience being the only just foundation for theory, people are often caught merely by the sound of the word, and do not stop to make the distinction between that partial experience which, on such subjects, is no foundation whatever for a just theory, and that general experience, on which alone a just theory can be founded. (1986, 3, 558)

952 CONCLUSION

There follows a mocking contrast between 'the theorist who calls himself practical, and the genuine theorist': There are perhaps few subjects on which human ingenuity has been more exerted than the endeavour to meliorate the condition of the poor; and there is certainly no subject in which it has so completely failed. The question between the theorist who calls himself practical, and the genuine theorist, is, whether this should prompt us to look into all the holes and corners of workhouses, and content ourselves with mulcting the parish officers for their waste of cheese parings and candle ends, and with distributing more soups and potatoes; or to recur to general principles, which show us at once the cause of the failure, and prove that the system has been from the beginning radically erroneous. There is no subject to which general principles have been so seldom applied; and yet, in the whole compass of human knowledge, I doubt if there be one in which it is so dangerous to lose sight of them; because the partial and immediate effects of a particular mode of giving assistance are so often directly opposite to the general and permanent effects' (558-9). In the course of justifying the benefits of formal allowance for exceptions to general rules in his Introduction to the Principles, Malthus provided a further potent defence of theoretical analysis: There are some eminent persons so strongly attached to the received general rule [1836: the general rules] of political economy, that, though they are aware that in practice some exceptions to them may occasionally occur; yet they do not think it wise and politic to notice them, for fear of directing the public attention too much and too frequently to exceptions, and thus weakening the force and utility of the general rule' (1820, 13; 1836, 10). The statement does not relate specifically to the 'doctrine of proportions' or the problem of optima. Malthus illustrated, rather, by reference in 1820 to exceptions to the general rule of the desirability of laissez-faire; and in 1836 to exceptions to the positive effect on growth of expanded trade (see chapter 18: VI). A policy of silence regarding exceptions in fact had the opposite impact on the reputation of economic theory than that intended. Malthus was concerned to defend that reputation, and made out a very strong case for 'theories and general principles,' subject to the qualifications insisted upon: Nothing can tend so strongly to bring theories and general principles into discredit as the occurrence of consequences, from particular measures [1836: premises], which have not been foreseen. Though in reality such an event forms no just objection to theory, in the general and proper sense of the term; yet it forms a most valid objection to the specific theory in question, as proving it in some way or other wrong; and with the mass of mankind this will pass for an impeachment of general principles and of the knowledge or good faith of those who are in the habit of inculcating them. It appears to me, I confess, that the most perfect sincerity, together with the greatest degree of accuracy attainable, founded upon the most comprehensive view of all the circumstances of the case,

CONCLUSION 953 are necessary to give that credit and circulation to general principles which is so desirable. And no views of temporary advantage, nor, what is more likely to operate, the fear of destroying the simplicity of a general rule, should ever tempt us to deviate from the strict line of truth, or to conceal or overlook any circumstances that may interfere with the universality of the principle. (1820, 14-15; 1836, 11-12; emphasis added)

In the second edition - concerned specifically with exceptions to the stimulatory effect on a country's wealth of 'the increasing wealth and prosperity of surrounding states' - this statement is further strengthened, again with an eye to preserving the good reputation of theory: 'It is not favourable to the science of political economy, that the same persons who have been laying down a rule as universal should be obliged to found their explanations of most important existing phenomena on the exceptions to it. It is surely much better that such a rule should be laid down at first with its limitations' (1836, 10). Reisman sees this statement as 'an attack on dogmatic thinkers who fail to see the limitations of a proposition until they are forced into an unexpected suspension of ceteris paribus (1990, 3). This is not quite the point. The exceptions are supposedly known to the theorist. Malthus's concern is to protect the good reputation of economic theory with the public by assuring that the known exceptions are clearly stated along with the general rule. It is scarcely surprising, given this position, that Malthus refused to join Richard Jones in his campaign to discredit deductive theory (see above, PP- 475-6)- He allowed a wide role for definitions as starting hypotheses in economics; he defended the principle of diminishing returns as an explanation of rent; and he charged Jones with neglecting 'the most important parts of the subject' namely, 'the progress of rent in new colonies' and the Ricardian case of 'farmer's rents in the most improved states of Europe' - and for going 'beyond the truth in his unwillingness to admit the tendency of continued accumulation, and of the progress of population and cultivation to lower the rates of profits and corn wages on the land' (letter to Whewell, 28 February 1831; TCL Add. Ms. c. 53*; de Marchi and Sturges, 1973, 386). In the Principles he actually referred to 'the separation of rents, as a kind of fixture upon lands of a certain quality,' as 'a law as invariable as the action of the principle of gravity (cited chapter 3, note 10) - a formulation surely worthy of James Mill! And, to Whewell, he expressed his concern that the anti-Ricardo campaign had gone too far: T am much gratified by the opinions of such judges as Mr. Jones and yourself in regard to what I may have done in Political Economy. I confess I felt that when I almost stood alone in my difference with Mr. Ricardo and was compared to Dr. Priestly amidst the new discoveries of chemistry, it would not finally be so. But I was hardly prepared to expect that in so short a time as has since elapsed, one of the questions in the political economy club should be "Whether any of the principles first advanced in Mr. Ricardo's work are

954 CONCLUSION

now acknowledged to be correct?" My apprehension at present is that the tide is setting too strong against him; and I even think that Mr. Jones is carried a little out of the right course by it. In his zeal to show that Mr. Ricardo is quite wrong, which he certainly is, in dwelling upon the diminished returns of agricultural capital as the sole cause of increasing rents, he seems inclined to deny the undoubted truth of the natural tendency to such diminished returns in a limited sphere, unless prevented by improvements in agriculture or manufactures' (31 May 1833, TCL Add. Ms. a.209n; de Marchi and Sturges, 391). And he even took Ricardo to task for inadequate logic, revealing his own perspective: The grand difficulty as you justly observe is in regard to the postulates; but it is still a matter of very great importance to be secure that no error creeps into the subsequent reasonings, and it must be allowed that Ricardo did not always draw correct conclusions from his premises.' Significantly, in the Principles, Mai thus envisaged a single general principle to account for all the rent varieties distinguished by Jones: 'This view of the subject includes all the different kinds of rent referred to by Mr. Jones, in his late valuable account of the state of rents, and the various modes of paying labour in different parts of the world. Whether the labourer is paid in money, in produce, or by a portion of land which he is to work himself with a part of his labour, while he gives the other part to his lord, the foundation of rent is exactly the same, depending always upon the value of the excess of what the whole of the lord's land produces, above that which under the actual circumstances is received by the cultivators, and the amount of rent which can be received from a given extent of land will rise according to all the different degrees of fertility above that which will only support the actual cultivators' (1836, I53~4n). Even in the context of the Bullionist debate, where deep methodological contrasts are so often discerned, we find that Malthus and Ricardo were on the same wavelength. Both appealed to 'experience,' though they read the evidence differently; and Malthus as well as Ricardo appealed to theory-based general principles. Recall his striking warning in 1811 against excessive note issues: 'If it is really intended to go on in the same spirit which has marked the last three years, there are no limits to the degree of depreciation which may be expected. All that has yet happened is in exact conformity with the general principles which have been laid down on this subject by those who are called theorists; and the experience of the past enables us, with the utmost certainty, to predict, that an excessive issue of paper in England will be accompanied with precisely the same results which have invariably attended it in other countries ...' (above, chapter 13, p. 673; emphasis added). The Introduction to the Principles clarifies more formally that the ideal was the establishment of generally accepted principles, and that appeal could be made to 'experts' and agreed-upon criteria of evaluation. Some progress had indeed been made since the subject had been 'raised into a science by the works of the Economists [1836: French Economists] and of

CONCLUSION 955

Adam Smith': 'Happily for the interests of the science and its usefulness to society, the Economists and Adam Smith entirely agreed on some of those great general principles which lead to the most important practical conclusions; such as the freedom of trade, and the leaving every person, while he adheres to the rules of justice, to pursue his own interest in his own way, together with some others: and unquestionably their agreement on these principles affords the strongest presumption of their truth' (1820, 2-3; 1836, 2). It is revealing to find an apparently universal presumption in favour of free enterprise, since the matter is absent from the discussion that follows of the 'great differences of opinion' that still remained: 'All the main propositions of the science have been examined, and the events which have since occurred, tending either to illustrate or confute them, have been repeatedly discussed. The result of this examination and discussion seems to be, that on some very important points there are still great differences of opinion. Among these, perhaps, may be reckoned - The definitions of wealth and of productive labour - The nature and measures of value - The nature and extent of the principles of demand and supply - The origin and progress of rent - The causes which determine the wages of labour and the profit of stock - The causes which practically retard and limit the progress of wealth - The level of the precious metals in different countries - The principles of taxation, &c' (1820, 3-4; 1836, 3). The list includes theoretical issues, the solution of which was 'obviously necessary to the improvement of the science' as well as the generation of 'practical rules': 'On all these points, and many others among the numerous subjects which belong to political economy, differences have prevailed among persons whose opinions are entitled to attention. Some of these questions are to a certain degree theoretical; and the solution of them, though obviously necessary to the improvement of the science, might not essentially affect its practical rules; but others are of such a nature, that the determination of them one way or the other will necessarily influence the conduct both of individuals and of governments; and their correct determination therefore must be a matter of the highest practical importance.'1 And though agreement could never be universal, considering the nature of political economy - presumably contrasting with mathematics - it could be reached by a majority of those deemed to be 'competent judges': Tn a science such as that of political economy, it is not to be expected that an universal assent should be obtained in all its important propositions; but,

l As for 'practical rules,' Malthus followed Ricardo's line in emphasizing the necessity for a sound body of theory to deal with taxation in particular, though his own Principles does not formally attend to applied public finance, as does Ricardo's: 'It depends entirely upon the general laws which regulate the wages of labour, the profits of stock, the rent of land, exchangeable value, the currencies of different countries, the production and distribution of wealth, &c. &c. whether any existing system of taxation be the best, or whether it might be altered for the better' (1820, 2O; 1836, 16).

956 CONCLUSION

in order to give them their proper weight and justify their being acted upon, it is extremely desirable, indeed almost necessary, that a considerable majority of those who, from their attention to the subject, are considered by the public as likely to be the most competent judges, should agree in the truth of them.' That Malthus in the Principles made no claim to having formulated a general system was evidently not a matter of 'Baconian' principle. He after all paid tribute to the Wealth of Nations as the best 'systematic treatise' available (1820, 5; 1836, 4). It was not, however, definitive, and he hoped for a restatement by a process involving logical refinement and empirical testing; in the interim, it was better that 'the different subjects which admit of doubt should be treated separately': 'The present period ... seems to be unpropitious to the publication of a new systematic treatise on political economy. The treatise which we already possess is still of the very highest value; and till a more general agreement shall be found to take place, both with respect to the controverted points of Adam Smith's work, and the nature and extent of the additions to it, which the more advanced stage of the science has rendered necessary, it is obviously more advisable that the different subjects which admit of doubt should be treated separately. When these discussions have been for some time before the public, and a sufficient opportunity has been given, by the collision of different opinions and an appeal to experience, to separate what is true from what is false, the different parts may then be combined into a consistent whole, and may be expected to carry with it such weight and authority as to produce the most useful practical results.'2 This procedure was a matter of strategy. The ideal is clear; he did not oppose 'system building' but premature system building. Malthus had hopes for the future resolution of remaining differences, though this would require appropriate absorption of new empirical materials: 'The last twenty or thirty years have ... been marked by a train of events of a most extraordinary kind; and there has hardly yet been time so to arrange and examine them as to see to what extent they confirm or invalidate the received principles of the science to which they relate.' But he wrote scathingly of writers who 'call themselves practical': 'Among those writers who have treated the subject scientifically, there is not perhaps, at the present moment, so general an agreement as would be desirable to give effect to their conclusions; and the writers who peculiarly call themselves practical, either draw no general inferences, or are so much influenced by narrow, partial, and sometimes interested views, that no reliance can be placed on them for the establishment of general rules' (1820, 4-5; 1836, 3-4). And subsequently, he repeated his opposition to the 'more practical opponents' of the 'scientific writers on political economy' who

2 On this passage, see Pullen, 1989, xxxvi.

CONCLUSION 957

'draw too hasty inferences from a frequent appeal to partial facts' (cited below, p. 965). There can then be no doubt of his formal rejection of simple-minded induction from purely empirical relations; Malthus sought a strong theoretical basis for any interpretation of the facts. As a conspicuous example, the higher profit rate in the period 1793-1813 than in 1727-57 had been urged against the land-scarcity approach as an adequate body of theory (see chapter 15: VI). But it remained to consider 'whether the circumstances which have been stated in this section [relative capital redundancy or deficiency] are sufficient to account theoretically for such a free operation of this principle, notwithstanding the progressive accumulation of capital, and the progressive cultivation of fresh land, as to allow of low profits at an earlier period of this progress and high [1836: higher] profits at a later period. At all events, the facts must be accounted for, as they are so broad and glaring, and others of the same kind are in reality of such frequent recurrence, that I cannot but consider them [1836: that they must be considered] as at once decisive against any theory of profits which is inconsistent with them' (1820, 320-1; 1836, 286-7). In both editions the 'relative redundancy of deficiency of capital' (or 'of capital and produce') is the favoured hypothesis to account for an increase in the profit rate notwithstanding 'the progressive cultivation of fresh land.' It is noteworthy also that his satisfaction with the theoretical explanation allowed greater confidence in approaching future prospects: 'It appears to me that the causes which have been mentioned are sufficient to account for [the pattern] theoretically, and to make such an event appear not only possible, but probable, and likely to be of frequent recurrence' (1820, 324). A conspicuous formulation of the concern for theory as such emerges in the discussion of international differences in value: 'But if we are not fully satisfied with this kind of reference to experience, it is obvious that the same conclusion follows inevitably from theory. In those countries where the precious metals are necessarily purchased, no plausible reason can be assigned why the quantity of them should be in proportion to the difficulty of producing the articles with which they are purchased' (1820, 115-16; see chapter 14, pp. 718—19). Malthus also represented his position on the Corn Laws as far as it involved diminishing returns and 'the laws of supply and demand' as a matter of 'general principle' confirmed by the parliamentary evidence (see chapter 15, pp. 747, 752) .3 Malthus's methodological position thus by no means constitutes a condemnation of deductive theory in favour of 'induction.' His general recommendations point rather to the construction of models based upon

3 The problem here is that the general principle of diminishing return is sometimes defined, given technology, and sometimes with allowance made for technical improvement (see chapter 15: VI). This matter will be taken up shortly.

958 CONCLUSION

sound general principles - 'realistic' axioms reflecting 'general experience' - for use in responsible applications. And significantly, despite the concern with application, we find in the Introduction to the Principles an eloquent appeal for 'the improvement,' indeed for the 'completion,' of the science based on 'just principles,' and this - in line with mathematics and the natural sciences - even if there should be no immediate practical advantages. The context is a complaint against those who 'do not look with a favourable eye on new and further inquiries, particularly if they do not see at once clearly and distinctly to what beneficial effects they lead, [an] indisposition to innovation, even in science, [which] may possibly have its use, by tending to check crude and premature theories; but... if carried too far... strikes at the root of all improvement' (1820, 15; 1836, 12). Again, he here had in mind developments since the 1790$: 'It is impossible to observe the great events of the last twenty-five years in their relation to subjects belonging to political economy, and sit down satisfied with what has been already done in the science. But if the science be manifestly incomplete, and yet of the highest importance, it would surely be most unwise to restrain inquiry, conducted upon just principles, even where the immediate practical utility of it was not visible. In mathematics, chemistry, and every branch of natural philosophy, how many are the inquiries necessary to their improvement and completion, which, taken separately, do not appear to lead to any specifically advantageous purpose! How many useful inventions, and how much valuable and improving knowledge would have been lost, if a rational curiosity and a mere love of information had not generally been allowed to be a sufficient motive for the search after truth!' (1820, 15-16; 1836, 12-13). Even pure theoretical inquiry thus had its place, though the practical return on progress in economics Mai thus believed to be potentially very great: 'I should not, therefore, consider it as by any means conclusive against further inquiries in political economy, if they would not always bear the rigid application of the test of cui bonofBut such, in fact, is the nature of the science, so intimately is it connected with the business of mankind, that I really believe more of its propositions will bear this test than those of any other department of human knowledge' (1820, 16; 1836, 13). It was 'unquestionably desirable, therefore, both with a view to the improvement and completion of the science, and the practical advantages which may be expected from it, that such inquiries should be pursued; and no common difficulty or obscurity should be allowed to deter those who have leisure and ability for such researches' (1820, 16-17; 1836, 13).

Despite a recurring theme of multicausality and the practical consequences of its neglect, Malthus also subscribed to 'the admirable rule of Newton, not to admit more causes than are necessary to the solution of the phe-

CONCLUSION 959

nomenon we are considering,' and insisted 'that those which really are necessary must be admitted' (1820, 7; 1836, 5-6). This was the nature of scientific progress: 'Before the shrine of truth, as discovered by facts and experience, the fairest theories and the most beautiful classifications must fall. The chemist of thirty years ago may be allowed to regret, that new discoveries in the science should disturb and confound his previous systems and arrangements; but he is not entitled to the name [1836: rank] of philosopher, if he does not give them up without a struggle, as soon as the experiments which refute them are fully established' (1820, 7; 1836, 6). 4 It is clearly refutation in favour of an alternative theory that is intended. Simplification and generalization were 'the desirable and legitimate object of genuine philosophy, wherever it can be effected consistently with truth' (1820, 6; 1836, 5). Indeed, Malthus recognized the danger in his quest to avoid oversimplified explanations, of arriving at a theory that was 'both complex and incorrect': 'One of the specific objects of the present work is to prepare the general rules [1836: some of the most important rules] of political economy for practical application, by a frequent reference to experience, and by taking as comprehensive a view as I can [1836: by endeavouring to take a comprehensive view] of all the causes that concur in the production of particular phenomena. I am sufficiently aware, that in this mode of conducting inquiry, there is a chance [1836: In this mode of conducting inquiry, there is, no doubt, a chance] of falling into errors of an opposite kind to those which arise from a tendency to simplification. Certain appearances, which are merely co-existent and incidental, may be mistaken for causes; and a theory formed upon this mistake will unite the double disadvantage of being both complex and incorrect' (1820, 21; 1836, 16-17). But forewarned was forearmed: 'Aware, however, of my liability to this error on the one side, and to the error of not referring sufficiently to experience on the other, my aim will be to pursue, as far as I am able, a just mean between the two extremes, and to approach, as near I can, to the great object of my research - the truth' (1820, 22; 1836, 17). This quest for balance - to the end of achieving a body of soundly based theory - is further elaborated in an insistence upon consistency with 'general experience' while admitting the need to avoid appeal to 'isolated facts': 'The tendency to premature generalization occasions also in some of the principal writers on political economy, an unwillingness to bring their theories to the test of experience. I should be the last person to lay an undue stress upon isolated facts, or to think that a consistent theory, which would account for the great mass of phenomena observable, was

4 The reference is probably to Joseph Priestley (see Pullen, in Malthus, 1820/1989, II, 289). Ironically, the same charge in the same terms was made against Malthus himself, as we shall see below, p. 990.

960 CONCLUSION

immediately invalidated by a few discordant appearances, the reality and the bearing of which, there might not have been an opportunity of fully examining. But certainly no theory can have any pretension to be accepted as correct, which is inconsistent with general experience. Such inconsistency appears to be at once a full and sufficient reason for its rejection' (1820, 10; 1836, 8). One again notes the objective of achieving a body of true or correct and complete theory, with high explanatory ability and consequent reliability in future application. A theory inconsistent with 'general experience' 'must be either radically false, or essentially incomplete; and in either case it can neither be adopted as a satisfactory solution of existing phenomena, nor acted upon with any degree of safety for the future' (1820, 11; 1836, 8). The type of experience intended can be inferred from an illustration taken from population theory: 'The first business of philosophy is to account for things as they are; and till our theories will do this, they ought not to be the ground of any practical conclusion. I should never have had that steady and unshaken confidence in the theory of population which I have invariably felt, if it had not appeared to me to be confirmed, in the most remarkable manner, by the state of society as it actually exists in every country with which we are acquainted. To this test I appealed in laying it down; and a frequent appeal to this sort of experience is pre-eminently necessary in most of the subjects of political economy, where various and complicated causes are often in operation, the presence of which can only be ascertained in this way' (1820, 11; 1836, 8-9). Malthus certainly frequently leaves an impression that he was engaged in a methodological revolt against Ricardo, insisting on an inherently different approach. Most conspicuous is his condemnation of 'theoretical' writers in a protest against the denial of the possibility of redundancy of capital and labour: 'It is a contradiction in terms, to say that labour is redundant compared with capital, and that capital is at the same time redundant compared with labour: - but it is no contradiction in terms to say that both labourers and capital may be redundant, compared with the means of employing them profitably. I have never maintained the former position, though I have been charged with so doing; but the latter has been so fully established by experience, that I am surprised at the pertinacity with which theoretical writers continue to refuse their assent to it' (1836, 4i4n).5 It would be excusable, though unjustified, were this response read as a condemnation of theory as such rather than of theory based on empirically invalid axioms generating results incapable of explaining the conspicuous phenomena of unemployment and excess capacity. Similarly, the sort of complaint against 'some of the ablest writers' in neglecting 'facts and experience' to be found in the reaction to Tooke in 1823 might be understood as an attack on deductive theory as such: 'This

5 Ricardo had accused Malthus of 'contradiction' (Ricardo, 1951-73, II, 9; VIII, 185).

CONCLUSION 961

mode of treating his subject we consider as peculiarly judicious. At all times an extensive collection of facts relative to the interchange of the various commodities of the commercial world ... cannot but be of great importance to the science of political economy; but it is more particularly required at the present moment, when it must be acknowledged that some of our ablest writers in this science have been deficient in that constant reference to facts and experience, on which alone it can be safely founded or further improved1 (iSssa/igSG, 7, 225; emphasis added). But as the close of this extract clarifies, the appeal was not for the abandonment of deductive theory but for improved model building based on realistic axioms.

We have thus far been concerned with Malthus's formal pronouncements on method. The positive case made out for deductive theory is confirmed by his practice. Here we shall summarize some salient features. Weyland (as we know from the Introduction, p. 6) was not fooled, as some commentators have been, into perceiving the Essay on Population as a work turning on empirico-historical procedures. The common notion of a major methological transition between the 1798 and later revisions has been overdone; the 1803 and the later editions also set out with the same sort of exercise in Euclidian geometry entailing self-evident axioms and irrefutable conclusions. Recall Malthus's explanation introduced in 1806 that he had not written a volume to prove the axioms, which were evidently acceptable as soon as stated (see chapter i, p. 57); and there is a prefatory assurance introduced in 1803 and repeated thereafter that while he had taken pains to assure the accuracy of 'the facts and calculations' reported, should 'any of them nevertheless turn out to be false, the reader will see that they will not materially affect the general tenour [1807: scope] of the reasoning' (1986, 3, iv; 1807, II, x). The structure of the work and its policy applications focus on a maximum conceivable permanent growth rate of population predicated upon a presumed maximum conceivable growth rate of food, and on the checks on population growth below the maximum imposed by actual growth of food. As Malthus explained to Senior in 1829, his purpose was to demonstrate 'that population was always ready, and inclined, to increase faster than food, if the checks which repressed it were removed' (above, chapter 18, p. 915) - that there was the potential for excessive population growth. The vast bulk of the empirical work introduced in 1803 - it transformed the 'look' of the Essay - was directed only at illustrating the checks actually at play over time and space which in practice constrain the growth of population. Thus it was that, in 1798, population (so he then believed) was growing slowly because of the checks imposed by the (supposedly) slow growth of the food supply; thereafter, the picture was transformed as the food supply expanded rapidly and the population growth rate followed suit as the checks were

962 CONCLUSION

relaxed. And in this context we find some of Malthus's most strongly stated formulations: 'The following proposition may be said to be capable of mathematical demonstration. In a country, the resources of which will not permanently admit of an increase of population more rapid than the existing rate, no improvement in the condition of the people, which would tend to diminish mortality, could possibly take place without being accompanied by a smaller proportion of births, supposing of course no particular increase of emigration ...' (see chapter i, p. 59). Indeed, he considered it essential to insert a chapter, 'Of the necessity of general principles on this subject [of population],' which commences with the insistance on theory following Hume (above, p. 951). In other contexts, too, Malthus took pride in his analytical contributions - witness, for example, his claims to priority for the analysis of the cost of acquiring the precious metals (see chapter 14: VIII); and his enthusiasm for such 'paradoxical' theorems as that relating to the advantage to labour of a high corn price (see chapter 4: IV). He was equally proud of the demonstration of the necessarily constant 'value of labour,' representing the proof in The Measure of Value as following from the axioms 'as strictly as any proposition in Euclid' (chapter 7, p. 323). Conspicuous analytical constructs include the endogenization of prudential population control and the brilliant exposition of the prospect of stationariness at high real wages (chapter 5: IV), Sraffian-type price theory (chapter 7: I), and the corn-profit model (chapter 10: III). Exercises in pure theory constitute a high proportion of Malthus's efforts in the Principles. And as we have demonstrated in Part II, neither Malthus's insistance on a demand—supply approach to price nor his charge that Ricardo's long-run theorizing was of little practical relevance precluded him from devoting himself almost entirely to reinforcing the long-run supply or cost dimension - he saw no technical role for 'utility' in value formation - and devising an appropriate measure of supply conditions. J.B. Say, we have shown (chapter 6: IX), identified Malthus with Ricardo regarding value theory, and Malthus accepted the identification. As for the measurement device - designed specifically for long-run equilibrium states (see chapter 7: IX) - Malthus in fact made stronger claims than did Ricardo. Ricardo's concern was to obtain an index of supply conditions in the technological sense of labour input, or rather labour input over time - 'time' representing the capital component. Were an ideal measure available, an increase in marginal labour input in agriculture would raise the gold price of corn, and any distributive change that might occur would leave relative prices unaffected. Time and again, he reiterated that, though 'absolute cost prices' include an allowance for profit, relative prices are not necessarily affected by a change in distribution; expressed equivalently, resource allocation may be unaffected by a change in distribution. The desideratum was precluded, he readily admitted, by the fact that the measure and the product in question will usually

CONCLUSION 963

be differentially affected by changes in distribution, and changes in cost prices would be recorded unrelated to the technical coefficients. Malthus, by contrast, sought an index to capture changes in both labour input and the profit rate, or of 'absolute value' in the strict sense. He himself admitted that his money measure - produced by labour alone, without a time component - could not distinguish between the impact on costs of changes in technological input and changes in the profit rate, but it captured their combined impact on either element, given the other. Thus, given the inputs into both the money measure and the commodity measured, a fall in the profit rate would be precisely reflected by a fall in the money price of the commodity. This is the case because, when the profit rate varies, the silver measure is unaffected in its absolute cost. Only other (capital-using) products are affected, among them Ricardo's measure (involving capital), which varies with every variation in the profit rate. From the Ricardian perspective this procedure involved selection of a measure at the extreme end of the spectrum; a worse choice could not be imagined. A fall in the profit rate would certainly be reflected in a change in the value of capital-using products expressed in Malthusian money. One may think of it as a rise of the wage rate which affects Malthusian money more than it affects a capital-using product, thus lowering its money value, and lowering it to a greater extent the greater its capital intensity. But, by the same token, it was useless as a measure of labour input since it could not distinguish between alterations in labour input and alterations in the profit rate. Thus it is that Ricardo admitted there to be no ideal measure, whereas Malthus insisted that there was. Since their desiderata differed, the two differed in their estimates of what was possible. But it is Malthus, not Ricardo, who makes the claim for an accurate measure of absolute value, working entirely in terms of long-run equilibrium in the course of his elaboration. With respect to growth theory, we have recorded in Parts I and II some elegant statements of the simultaneous decline in the corn-wage and profit rates turning on a land scarcity-based growth model - the 'canonical' model. Certainly there is the insistence on accounting for profit-rate and wage-rate movements unrelated to increasing land scarcity in terms of Smithian 'competition of capitals'; but the story, we have found, is one of attempted reconciliation of the two perspectives, and in the end it is Malthus who hits upon a Sraffa-type approach to profit-rate determination involving corn input-corn output reasoning generating an agricultural rate to which the manufacturing rate must conform. A nicer case of long-run equilibrium analysis it is difficult to imagine. As a further illustration of the present theme, the analysis of sustainable growth (above, chapter 11) is concerned with the conditions of long-term expansion. That was the main preoccupation. The matter of stabilization (chapter 12), important though it is, was secondary, as evidenced by the fact that the analysis of sustainable growth stands sentinel - we shall return

964 CONCLUSION

to this matter in our final summing up - and because Malthus came increasingly to see the postwar years as something of an aberration (chapter 12: III).

A word on the empirical dimension to Mai thus's economics. As mentioned above, the mass of materials added in 1803 and thereafter to the Essay on Population was largely 'illustrative,' and there were those (such as Weyland) who refused to read this as genuine induction. In other important contexts, too, the quality of the empirical dimension was questioned. As for agricultural protection, Horner wrote to Malthus critically regarding one of the main planks of the case for protection: 'Why do you say, [i8i5a/i986, 7, 164; see chapter 12, note 30] that "in all common years, France will furnish us with a large proportion of our supplies?" This affirmation is not founded upon the parliamentary evidence, which bears the contrary way' (12 February 1815; in Horner, 1853, H» 226). And he proceeded to an extraordinarily detailed criticism of Mai thus's use of current and historical data, including the empirical case in support of the proposition that corn-price fluctuations would be exaggerated under (bogus) free trade compared with import prohibition (226-7). This challenge to Malthus on the latter's home ground - insistence on respect for the evidence - is potentially of high significance. But Malthus in his reply, written in haste, conceded nothing of substance.6 It also remains to note that Malthus did not pretend to intimate knowledge of the corn trade to permit detailed suggestions regarding the precise mechanism of restriction (1986, 7, 173). But he accepted the limit price of 8os. per quarter to be the generally recognized price that 'in the actual state of things ... would prevent our cultivation from falling back, and perhaps allow it to be progressive.' This latter is a rather weak statement, given the highly optimistic evaluation of prospects under protection in the closing paragraph of the pamphlet: T firmly believe that, in the actual state of Europe, and under the actual circumstances of our present situation, it is our wisest policy to grow our own average supply of corn; and, in so doing, I feel persuaded that the country has ample resources for a great and continued increase of population, of power, of wealth, and of happiness' (174)Ill THE FORMAL CRITIQUE OF RICARDIAN THEORY

We have established Mai thus's positive case for deductive theory and his

6 I am grateful to Professor Kenneth Bourne for providing me with the reply, dated 16 February 1815, since published in Horner, 1994, 820-2.

CONCLUSION 965

own 'long-run' procedures. Even in the course of the sometimes sharply worded criticism of the 'New School,' it emerges that his objections were specifically directed against what he perceived to be: (i) excessively simplified models; and (2) inappropriate applications, but not against deductive theory as such. An early statement of Malthus's perceived differences with Ricardo regarding method will be found in the letter dated 23 February 1812 (chapter 14, p. 706). Movements of the exchange rate might be generated by non-monetary disturbance, and did not solely reflect relative money values, runs Malthus's contention, whereas '[it] really appears that a desire to simplify, which has often led away the most scientific men, has induced you to ascribe to one cause phenomena that properly belongs to two, and not to give sufficient weight to the facts which (to me at least) appear to make against your doctrine' (in Ricardo, 1951-73, VI, 82). As explained years later and more formally in the Introduction to the Principles, his complaint against contemporary 'scientific writers' was that they engaged in 'a precipitate attempt to simplify and generalize,' and failed to test theory against experience, though (as we know from section II) he is equally critical of the 'practical opponents' of theory: 'The principal cause of error, and of the differences which prevail at present among the scientific writers on political economy, appears to me to be a precipitate attempt to simplify and generalize; and while their more practical opponents draw too hasty inferences from a frequent appeal to partial facts, these writers run into a contrary extreme, and do not sufficiently try their theories by a reference to that enlarged and comprehensive experience which, on so complicated a subject, can alone establish their truth and utility' (1820, 5-6; 1836, 4-5). The tendency of 'minds of a certain cast' to simplify and generalize had led to crude and premature theories - this 'in almost every science with which we are acquainted' (1820, 6; 1836, 5). In political economy, specifically, 'the desire to simplify has occasioned an unwillingness to acknowledge the operation of more causes than one in the production of particular effects; and if one cause would account for a considerable portion of a certain class of phenomena, the whole has been ascribed to it without sufficient attention to the facts, which would not admit of being so solved.' Again, the Bullionist controversy regarding the cause of the unfavourable exchange and the excess of the market over the mint price of bullion illustrated the propensity towards monocausal interpretations, for 'scarcely one writer seemed willing to admit of the operation of both theories, the combination of which, sometimes acting in conjunction and sometimes in opposition, could alone adequately account for the variable and compli-cated phenomena observable' (1820, 6-7; 1836, 5). The letter to Macvey Napier dated 8 October 1821 amplifies the complaint (see chapter 8, p. 408). Here Malthus compares the Ricardians (McCulloch and Mill) - who had 'adopted a theory which will not stand the test of experience' - with the Physiocrats: 'Their system takes a partial

966 CONCLUSION

view of the subject, like the system of the French Economists; and like that system, after having drawn into its vortex a great number of very clever men, it will be unable to support itself against the testimony of obvious facts, and the weight of those theories, which though less simple and captivating, are more just on account of embracing more of the causes which are in actual operation in all economical results' (B.L. Add. Mss 34, 612 f-453).7 The Quarterly Review attack on the New Political Economy (1824) elaborates further on this same methodological theme and mind-set of its practitioners: 'The system of the new school of political economy has always struck us as bearing a very remarkable resemblance to the system of the French economists. Their founders were equally men of the most unquestionable genius; of the highest honour and integrity, and of the most simple, modest and amiable manners. Their systems were equally distinguished for their discordance with common notions, the apparent closeness of their reasonings, and the mathematical precision of their calculations and conclusions founded on their assumed data. These qualities in the systems and their founders, together with the desire so often felt by readers of moderate abilities of being thought to understand what is considered by competent judges as difficult, increased the number of their devoted followers in such a degree, that in France it included almost all the able men who were inclined to attend to such subjects, and in England a very large proportion of them' (i824a/i986, 7, 297). 'The specific error of the new school in England' - so runs the charge - 'is the having taken so confined a view of value as not to include the results of demand and supply, and the relative abundance and competition of capital.' This latter position has been encountered conspicuously in our chapter 10, on profit-rate determination. There we found reference to the same purported failing - that 'notwithstanding the utter inadequacy of this single cause [diminishing agricultural returns] to account for existing phenomena, Mr. Ricardo, in his very ingenious chapter on profits has dwelt on no other' (above, p. 472), thus committing a fundamental methodological error. The criticism is expressed in terms of a striking mechanical analogy, a perspective that amply confirms that the case does not involve an attack on theory per se: If the premises were all such as he has supposed them to be, that is, if no other cause operated on profits than the increasing difficulty of procuring the food of the labourer, and no other cause affected the exchangeable and money value

7 Mai thus probably intended his objection that the Physiocrats excluded 'the results of manufacturing and mercantile industry' from 'wealth,' a complaint that is the subjectmatter of a chapter in Definitions in Political Economy, commencing with the insistence that the term 'wealth' not be restricted 'either to the gross raw produce, or the net raw produce' (18273/1986, 8, 9, 38). This objection is also spelled out in 1824, and in the Invararity report of 1830.

CONCLUSION 967 of commodities than the quantity of labour which they had cost in production, the conclusion which he has drawn would be just, and the rate of profits would certainly be regulated in the way which he has described. But, since in the actual state of things the premises are most essentially different from those which he has supposed; since another most powerful cause operates upon profits, as I have endeavoured to shew in the present section [on wage fluctuations]; and since the exchangeable value of commodities is not determined by the labour they have cost, as I endeavoured to shew in a former chapter, the conclusion drawn by Mr. Ricardo must necessarily contradict experience; not slightly, and for short periods, as the market prices of some articles occasionally differ from the natural or necessary price, properly explained; but obviously and broadly, and for periods of such extent, that to overlook them, would not be merely like overlooking the resistance of the air to a falling body, but like overlooking the change of direction given to a ball by a second impulse acting at a different angle from the first. (308-9)

The summary proceeds to reject 'the conclusion at which Mr. Ricardo arrives in his chapter on profits, "that in all countries, and at all times, profits depend upon the quantity of labour required to produce necessaries for the labour on that land, or with that capital which yields no rent"' (3°9) • (The validity of this and other charges is considered below, section VIII.) Malthus's sharp criticisms of Thomas Tooke (above, chapter 11, p. 540) are relevant here. The context relates to the complaint that Tooke (1823) had declared his adherence to Say's Law of Markets, despite its failure to account for 'past phenomena': 'As we have always been of the opinion ... that the sole use of political economy is its application to practice, and that no theories are entitled to confidence in reference to the future, which will not give a satisfactory solution of past phenomena, we were disposed to hail Mr. Tooke's work as specifically calculated to set aside a theory which is directly contradicted by the most general experience, and as far as it has prevailed has wrested the science of political economy from its only just and safe foundation. What then was our disappointment to find that, although Mr. Tooke has written in such a way as, we trust, will convince others, he does not seem to be convinced himself! In a note to the last part of his work (iv, p. 5) he still declares his adherence to the doctrine of M. Say on supply and demand as explained by Mr. Mill in his Elements of Political Economy (i823a/i986, 7, 244-5). Tooke 'professes to believe that the aggregate of demand must always be equal to the aggregate supply,' though he himself had 'distinctly and luminously proved [the contrary] both by a correct train of reasoning, and what is of much more importance a constant appeal to a crowd of well-attested facts' (245). On this formulation, confidence in a theory for future application to practice lies in its explanatory record. And it has emerged from the methodological criticisms of both the New (Ricardo) School and the Physiocrats

968 CONCLUSION

that explanatory power will be enhanced if the model itself captures accurately empirical reality, a characteristically complex reality; the 'realistic' specification of axioms or 'general principles' is thus represented as a precondition for success. Also pertinent is Malthus's complaint (see chapter 11, p. 577) against the supposed neglect by Ricardo of evidence pointing to increased demand for leisure following higher agricultural productivity. The purported neglect undermined the prediction whereby 'the greater ... the facility of procuring food, the more abundantly will the people be supplied with conveniences and luxuries,' and illustrated a broader failure: 'One among the many rash and false conclusions which are often made from the want of due attention to the change which the application of a proposition may make in the premises on which it rests [1836: often made in the application of a proposition without due attention to all the parts of the premises on which it rests]. In the present case, all depends upon the supposition of a given degree of industry and skill, and the means of employing them [1836: and the encouragement to employ them]. But if, after the necessaries of life were obtained, the workman should consider indolence as a greater luxury than those which he was likely to procure by further labour, the proposition would at once cease to be true. And as a matter of fact, confirmed by all the accounts we have of nations, in the different stages of their progress, it must be allowed that this choice seems to be very general in the early periods of society and by no means uncommon in the most improved states' (1820, 378-9; 1836, 333-4). The characteristic complexity of valid economic models generated severe problems in the quest for responsible application. The so-called doctrine of proportions (see section VI) encapsulates some of these difficulties, especially in contexts involving the aggregative demand-supply relation. But the concern was widespread. As a conspicuous example, it will be recalled (chapter 17, p. 828) that the case for agricultural protection was made out in 1815 in part on the grounds that the alternative was not genuine free trade, which fact entirely altered the recommendation: 'I protest most entirely against the doctrine, that we are to pursue our general principles without ever looking to see if they are applicable to the case before us; and that in politics and political economy, we are to go straight forward, as we certainly ought to do in morals, without any reference to the conduct and proceedings of others' (1986, 7, 158). Similarly, the existence of a heavy national debt made the question 'fundamentally different from that of a simple question about a free or restricted trade' (171). To consider it thus was 'to expect the same results from premises which have essentially changed their nature.' Malthus, furthermore, insisted on the inappropriateness in many instances of drawing practical conclusions from exercises in comparative statics. For example, the problem should not be phrased as the consequences for rent of sudden improvements in fertility (1820, 206-7; 1836,

CONCLUSION 969

195-6), or of changes in diet, given population (1820, 231; 1836, 211). Similarly, regarding the effect of 'machinery' (chapter 9: III; chapter 11: XIV). Such changes occur gradually during the course of ongoing growth. Again, this perspective is represented as contrasting with Ricardo's. Did Malthus practise what he preached in insisting that allowance be made in application for special circumstances that modify general principles? (We have reviewed his own general theoretical orientation in section II.) The fact is that several of his applications are more 'extreme' than Ricardo's. This applies to his application of wage-fund theorizing to deny the efficacy of workers' combinations (1817, III, 371), Ricardo objecting both to the analysis and to the application (1951-73, VII, 203). Similarly, there is the application of the doctrine to Poor Law policy, Malthus focusing on the constraints imposed by the food supply and Ricardo refusing to place any weight on such constraints on grounds of an elastic response of food to higher demand (1951-73, VII, 3, 202). IV

METHODOLOGICAL OBJECTIONS TO ADAM SMITH

While it is true that Mai thus's primary target was Ricardo, the fact neglected by so many commentators is that Adam Smith was also subject to objections on similar methodological grounds.8 We should here have in mind that criticisms of Smith's procedures on grounds of hasty application of deductions drawn from incomprehensive models - procedures in our day designated the 'Ricardo Vice' - were common enough amongst Malthus's contemporaries. Sir Edward West, for example, complained that 'the opinion that the demand for labour is regulated solely by the amount of capital, has originated in a mode of reasoning very much used by Dr. Smith, which frequently furnishes very beautiful illustrations, often gives a clue to important conclusions, and is always a very excellent test of the truth of our inductions, but which from an incautious use of it has led perhaps to more false conclusions in the science than any other cause. I mean the reasoning from an assumed state of society and facts, and considering what the effects of the known or supposed principles of human nature would be in a state of society such as never existed' (1826, 80). John Rae complained of Smith's excessive system-building: Smith 'has himself in all his speculations, adopted the explanatory and systematizing form of

8 Cf. Blaug, 1980, 58: 'Malthus had severe misgivings about Ricardo's methodology, particularly about Ricardo's habit of directing exclusive attention to the long-run equilibrium implications of economic forces, and he suspected, although he was never able clearly to express it, that there was in Smith an inductive method that was diametrically opposed to Ricardo's deductive approach.' The remainder of Blaug's statement on Malthus holds good: 'In practice, however, Malthus's style of reasoning was identical to that of Ricardo and their wide disagreement on questions of value and the possibility of, "general gluts" involved no substantive differences in methodology.'

970 CONCLUSION

philosophizing, instead of the scientific and inductive ... [His] object being every where to build common facts and familiar observations into a system, not to inquire into the causes or real laws from which they spring, he takes these things for fundamental principles which would present themselves to the inductive inquirer as phenomena, the principles of which his manner of philosophizing would call on him to investigate' (1834/1965, II, 334-5)There were those who warmly approved of Smithian system building, James Mill conspicuous among them. Mill had nothing but praise for Smith's system-building propensity. His general evaluation is brought out in a contrast drawn in 1806 between Smith and Sir James Steuart: 'The general principles of Political Economy seem to become more obscure in his hands than they were before ... there is no combination of principles in his volumes which can be called a system at all ... Dr. Smith reared the study to the dignity of a science. He explained the real sources of wealth, which till his time had been so grossly misunderstood; and conferred as great a benefit upon Political Economy, as was conferred on Astronomy by those philosophers who first confuted the perplexed doctrine of the cycles and epicycles, and established the simple principles of the Copernican system' (1806, 231-2). Mill's commendation is all the more important since his reviews are replete with criticisms of those he considered insufficiently speculative. As for detail, Mill's wholly Smithian analysis of the corn-export bounty is particularly revealing. Appreciation of Smith's case against the bounty turned upon 'a single principle ... that the nature of the farmer's business is altogether different ... from all other trades' (1804, 23-4). In this context, we meet the typically uncompromising phraseology that characterizes all of Mill's writings: 'No proposition is better established than this, that the multiplication of the human species is always in proportion to the means of subsistence,' the consequence of which was that 'the production of corn creates the market for corn.' Conversely, 'to send away any part of the regular produce of the country' - a consequence of the bounty - 'however rapidly that produce may be increasing, is just to cut short a proportional part of the natural population of the country.' And we have the full-fledged Smithian analysis of the consequence of the bounty on general prices by way of the effect upon money wages: 'We must next advert to the view which Dr. Smith has exhibited of this subject, a view which any one can affect to treat lightly only from not understanding it. No proposition is established more thoroughly to the conviction of those who have studied the scientific principles of political economy than this; that the money price of corn, regulates the money price of every thing else .... Nothing then can be more incontrovertible than the proposition of Smith, that "the real effect of the bounty is not so much to raise the real value of corn, as to degrade the real value of silver; or to make an equal quantity of it exchange for a smaller quantity, not only of corn, but of all other commodities'" (36-8). The important feature of all this is Mill's

CONCLUSION 971

approval of the Smithian analysis including some very strong assumptions: (i) the simplified concept of 'corn' as a shorthand for worker's subsistence; and (2) the population doctrine used to assure constancy of the corn wage. Also conspicuous is the neglect of time lags, or disequilibria. Others saw things in a wholly different light. De Sismondi compared Smith's view of political economy as 'une science d'experience' with Ricardo's speculations (1827/1951,1, 69-70). Longfield observed of Smith that he 'appears not to have possessed much taste or capacity for long or subtle trains of reasoning. The "Wealth of Nations" is written with very little attention to system, and this circumstance has probably tended to increase its utility. It prevented any error from infecting the entire work. An erroneous principle would not lead the author far astray' (1834/1971, 262) .9 Where did Malthus stand? In the Principles he paid tribute to the Wealth of Nations as the best 'systematic treatise' available and 'still of the very highest value' (1820, 5; 1836, 4).10 He pointed out - certainly with the aggregate-demand issue in mind - that 'many of the doctrines of Adam Smith, which had been considered as settled, have lately been called in question by writers entitled to great attention; but they have often failed, as it appears to me, to make good their objections; and in all such cases I have thought it desirable to examine anew, with reference to such objections, the grounds on which his doctrines are founded' (1820, 22; 1836, 17-18). In 1824 he wrote of the conversion of French economists to 'the juster and more practical theory of Adam Smith' and expressed his hopes for the future in Britain: 'Facts and experiences have, in the course of some years, gradually converted the economists of France from the erroneous and inapplicable theory of Quesnay to the juster and more practical theory of Adam Smith; and as we are fully convinced that an error equally fundamental and important is involved in the system of the new school in England as in that of the French economists, we cannot but hope and expect that similar causes will, in time, produce in our own country similar effects in the correction of error and the establishment of truth' (1986, 7, 297). And it is here that he criticized the Ricardian New School for altering Smith's theories 'upon mere speculation; and not because they do not accord with facts and experience' (258). The commendation of Smith in the contrast with the Physiocrats refers to his extension of national income to include the industrial sector (see chapter 8, p. 408); and the objection to the Ricardians in the same context

9 The context is Longfield's rejection of diminishing agricultural returns as the 'cause' of a secularly falling profit rate. 10 Malthus charged Smith with inconsistency regarding value measurement, notwithstanding his status as 'principal founder of the science of political economy,' having in mind the definition of value-in-exchange as general purchasing power (see chapter 7, p. 295).

972 CONCLUSION

is to their rejection of the Smithian notion of 'competition of capitals' as conflicting with the Law of Markets. The Ricardians had simply abandoned, on (spurious) logical grounds, the 'correct theory of profits' Malthus's own term (see chapter 10, p. 466) - confirmed inter alia by the buoyant war years and the postwar depression. Much of his energy went into an attempt to reinforce Smithian doctrine. But this is far from the whole story. First, the Wealth of Nations also provided illustrations of the danger of arriving at 'complex' but 'incorrect' theory (above, p. 959), because of erroneous and careless inductions from the data 'not warranted by general principles' (1820, 21; 1836, 16). The example given involves Smith's apparent subscription at one point to increasing agricultural returns, and the notion that corn imports cannot 'interfere with home growth'; Malthus's appeal to sound general principles in so central a context is striking: I am inclined to think that Adam Smith occasionally fell into this error, and drew inferences [1836: Adam Smith has occasionally fallen into this error, and drawn inferences] from actual appearances, not warranted by general principles. From the low price of wheat, for instance, during the first half of the last century, he seems to infer [1836: have inferred] that wheat is generally cheaper in rich than in poor countries; and from the small quantity of corn actually imported during that period, even in the scarcest years, he infers [1836: has inferred] generally, that the quantity imported can never be such as to interfere with the home growth. The actual state of things at a subsequent period, and particularly during the last twenty-five years, has sufficiently shown that these appearances were merely incidental; that a very rich country may have its corn extremely dear, as we should naturally expect; and that importation in England has amounted to more than 1/10 instead of 1/571 [1836: 1/517] part of the crop raised in the country; and may therefore, essentially [1836: to a considerable extent] interfere with the home growth. (1820, 21-2; 16-17)"

A related complaint emerges in 1815 - namely, Smith's failure to appreciate that in equilibrium — when a 'state of rest has been nearly attained' and the exchanges are at par - the precious metals are not on a level: 'That Adam Smith, who proposes labour as the true measure of value at all times and in all places, could look around him, and yet say that the precious metals were always the highest in value in the richest countries,

11 Malthus, however, believed that Smith's omission was less serious than that of the Ricardians: 'In dwelling solely upon the abundance and competition of capital, he is practically much nearer the truth than those who dwell almost exclusively on the quality of the last land taken into cultivation' (see above, pp. 453, 775). But we have also seen that he could never make up his mind as to whether Smith had or had not recognized the diminishing-returns principle, attaching a note conceding an implicit allowance for the phenomenon.

CONCLUSION 973

has always appeared to me most unlike his usual attention to found his theories on facts' (i8i5b/ig86, 7, igSn; see chapter 14, p. 713). As early as 1811, Malthus had taken Smith to task for a careless interpretation of Scottish experience of the 17505. (For the background to this, see chapter 13:VI). He himself followed Hume in attributing an initial expansion of output to the stimulus of temporary price increases resulting from a net increase in the money supply, and the subsequent fall in prices to output expansion such as 'to restore [the quantity of commodities] ... to a level with the increased currency': In 1751 and 1752, when Hume published his Political Discourses, and soon after the great multiplication of paper money in Scotland, there was a very sensible rise in the price of provisions; and this was naturally, and probably justly, attributed by him, in part, to the abundance of paper. In 1759, when the paper currency had probably not been diminished, Dr. Smith notices a different state of prices; and observes that, for a long period, provisions had never been cheaper. The dearness at the time that Hume wrote, he attributes carelessly, and without any inquiry about the fact, to the badness of the seasons; and intimates, that it could not be occasioned by the multiplication of paper money. The probability, however, seems to be, that the high prices of 1751 and 1752 were influenced by the paper, - as we do not see how it is possible for the substitution of paper for coin to take place, without an increase of prices; but that the new stimulus given to industry to this increase of capital, had so increased the quantity of commodities in the interval between 1752 and 1759, as to restore them to a level with the increased currency. (181 la/1986, 7, 49)

The charges against Smith extend further still. Malthus took a harsh line towards Smith regarding the effect of changes in the corn price, upon which turned the remarkable Smithian conclusion that government intervention in the corn trade would be to no avail. In the second edition of his Essay on Population, Malthus added a chapter entitled 'Of Bounties on the Exportation of Corn,' taking exception to Smith's extreme formulation, including his neglect of lagged relationships. A rise in the price of corn occasioned by the export subsidy would affect the agricultural profit rate, since money wages and general prices do not rise in proportion: 'The money price of corn, in a particular country, is undoubtedly by far the most powerful ingredient in regulating the price of labour, and of all other commodities; but it is not the sole ingredient. Many parts of the raw produce of land, though affected by the price of corn, do not, by any means, rise and fall exactly in proportion to this price. When great improvements in manufacturing machinery have taken place in any country, the part of the expence arising from the wages of labour will bear a comparatively small proportion to the whole value of the wrought commodity, and consequently, the price of it, though affected by the price of corn, will not be affected proportionally' (1803/1986, 3, 683). Even assum-

974 CONCLUSION

ing a proportionate rise in the money wage rate, taxes and rents - which are assumed here to enter costs - will be roughly constant, so that agricultural profitability must rise (684). Similar reasoning was applied to the short-run effects of freer corn importation. Here the fall in the price of corn has disastrous effects on profitability, since, in consequence of relatively constant rental and tax charges, in addition to sticky money wages, costs do not fall proportionately. These considerations could not be neglected in practical policy applications: 'When great and numerous taxes on consumption exist in any country, those who live by the wages of labour must always receive wherewithall to pay them, at least all those upon necessaries, such as soap, candles, leather, salt, &c. A fall in the price of corn, therefore, though it would decrease that part of the wages of labour which resolves itself into food, evidently, would not decrease the whole in the same proportion. And besides these, and other limitations which might be named, the experienced difficulty of lowering wages when once they have been raised, should be taken into consideration before the position can be practically applied.' In an earlier chapter Mai thus had expressed the fear that easy corn importation would drive down the corn price, but not the money wage: 'Experience warrants us in saying, that, from political fears, or other causes, the fall in the price of labour would be uncertain; but the ruin of our agriculture would be certain' (677). Again, in the Observations (1814): 'Nothing ... can be more evident both from theory and experience, than that the price of corn does not immediately and generally regulate the prices of labour and all other commodities; and that the real price of corn is capable of varying for periods of sufficient length to give a decided stimulus or discouragement to agriculture' (see chapter 6, p. 239). This critical evaluation turned both on the failure of Smith to take account of the empirical complexity of the wage basket and of lagged relations, and on internal or logical inconsistency namely, the extraction of corn from standard allocation theory. In fact, Malthus asserted that Smith realized that corn could not be treated as an exception to the allocative generalizations applicable to all other commodities, and deliberately fudged: 'That no such exception exists with regard to corn, is implied in all the general reasonings of the Wealth of Nations. Dr. Smith evidently felt this; and wherever, in consequence, he does not shift the question from the exchangeable value of corn to its physical properties, he speaks with an unusual want of precision and qualifies his positions by the expressions much, and in any considerable degree' (1814/1986, 7, 91). This is a severe charge indeed, though (as we have shown in chapter 6, p. 240) Malthus himself is open to precisely the same charge by his application of the Law of Markets to food, which entails the strict interdependence of demand and supply curves.12 12 But Malthus himself was inconsistent in this regard; see chapter 6, p. 246; also 3, p. 104; 8, p. 398; 11, p. 538.

CONCLUSION 975

Smith had responded with 'hauteur' to similar criticisms made by Anderson in 1777, suggesting the absence of any valid defence (Hollander, 1979, 41-2; also 1987, 322-3, and Dow, 1984). We must ask whether, so far as concerns Smith, it suffices to leave the matter there, or whether we should seek further for an account of his peculiar position. Malthus himself did go farther. He suggested that Smith was carried away by the attraction of pet theoretical notions, specifically 'his habit of considering labour as the standard measure of value, and corn as the measure of labour'; these measures, if accurate, together implied that given quantities of corn 'on an average of a few years, at all times and in all countries, purchase the same quantity of labour and of the necessaries and conveniences of life' (1814/1986, 7, 92-3). That 'neither labour nor any other commodity can be an accurate measure of real value in exchange, is now considered as one of the most incontrovertible doctrines of political economy; and indeed follows as a necessary consequence, from the very definition of value in exchange.'13 And the variability of the corn wage 'from year to year ... century to century ... and for ten, twenty, and thirty years together' was an established fact of economic life.14 If this is supposed to constitute an ultimate explanation of Smith's position, it will scarcely do; it merely pushes the question a step back, since Smith himself frequently emphasized the variability of the corn wage. But for us here the important point is that criticisms one usually thinks of as directed at Ricardo are also applied to Smith, and at key junctures. One further striking illustration of Malthus's methodological objections to the Wealth of Nations, emerges below, in section VI. In championing a systematic allowance for 'limitations and exceptions' in formulating general economic principles, a requirement imposed by the characteristic 'doctrine of proportions,' the putative illegitimate procedure is illustrated by reference to Smith's - not Ricardo's - propositions that 'capitals are increased by parsimony' and that 'every frugal man is a public benefactor.' V

ON VERIFICATION, PREDICTION, AND DISTURBING CAUSES: THE USES OF ECONOMIC THEORY

To this point, it has appeared that the test for valid theory turned on its explanatory power or consistency with 'general experience' (above, pp. 959f). This leads us to the problem of 'disturbing causes.' In considering this problem, it proves helpful to have in mind an evaluation of the 13 Malthus, of course, later withdrew all this and reinstated labour commanded - as an ideal measure into the bargain - so that all the criticism addressed at Smith can be returned to sender. 14 The complaint against Smith's assumption in his Digression on Silver of a constant long-run corn wage is conspicuous in the Principles (1820, 123; 1836, 121; see above, chapter 7, pp. 280, 298-9).

976 CONCLUSION

classical view on theory 'verification' offered by Mark Blaug: 'Over and over again, in Senior, in Mill, in Cairnes, and even in Jevons, we have found the notion that "verification" is not a testing of economic theories to see whether they are true or false, but only a method of establishing the boundaries of application of theories deemed to be obviously true: one verifies in order to discover whether "disturbing causes" can account for the discrepancies between stubborn facts and theoretically valid reasons; if they do, the theory has been wrongly applied, but the theory itself is still true. The question of whether there is any way of showing a theory to be false is never even contemplated' (1980, 81). No mention is made here of Malthus. Where did Malthus stand on these matters? From what we have seen already, Malthus did countenance, at least in principle, the isolation and rejection of 'false' theories, evaluating theory in terms of its explanatory power. This formal allowance is seen in practice throughout the impressive analysis of the postwar depression (see chapter 12), where he makes an excellent case for his own over Ricardo's explanatory hypothesis. And it is confirmed in the following passage, which takes account of failures of theory - revealed by failures of prediction - resulting not only from 'specific misapplication' but also from 'general inapplicability' and logical error: 'A theory may appear to be correct, and may really be correct under given premises; it may further appear that these premises are the same as those under which the theory is about to be applied; but a difference, which might before have been unobserved, may shew itself in the difference of the results from those which were expected; and the theory may justly be considered as failing, whether this failure arises from an original error in its formation, or from its general inapplicability, or specific misapplication, to actual circumstances' (1820, 11; 1836, 9; emphasis added). It is very clear that he perceived the Law of Markets - and any exclusive version of agricultural profit-rate analysis - as invalid in part because of 'original error': 'The new school suppose that the mass of commodities obtained by the same quantity of labour remains always substantially of the same value, and that the variations of profits are determined by the variations in the value of this same quantity of labour; while Adam Smith and Mr Malthus suppose that the value of the same quantity of labour remains substantially the same, and that the variations of profits are determined by the variations in the value of the commodities produced by this same quantity of labour. In the one case, the varying value of labour is considered as the great moving principle in the progress of wealth; in the other, the varying value of the produce of labour. The difference is most distinct and important. And as political economy, according to the first description of it in the present treatise, "is not a science of speculation, but of fact and experiment," the specific question is, which of the two views here stated best explains the broad and established facts of which we have had experience' (i824a/ig86, 7, 295). Malthus had the better of Ricardo in accounting for the post-i8i5

CONCLUSION 977

depression. It is, however, regrettable and surprising that he failed to provide specific illustrations of the central theme of his analysis of sustainable growth - that 'almost all merchants and manufacturers save, in prosperous times, much more rapidly than it would be possible for the national capital to increase, so as to keep up the value of the produce' (see chapter 11, pp. 530, 584). It is also true that, on one conspicuous occasion, Malthus explicitly expressed his confidence in his analysis, despite admitted difficulty in providing confirmatory evidence. I refer to the oscillatory pattern of growth, which Malthus allowed 'will not be remarked by superficial observers; and it may be difficult even for the most penetrating mind to calculate its period' (cited chapter 1, p. 44; see also p. 63). Malthus like Adam Smith and Ricardo - found inductive procedures as a means of discerning cause—effect relations sterile; and in the present case there were too many counteracting forces 'concealing' the oscillations, which 'no reflecting man who considers the subject deeply can well doubt.' More generally, he recognized a characteristic resilience of theory against refutation. This is clear from his insistence on recognizing modifications, limitations, and exceptions to any general rule or proposition (above, section II); and it emerges also in a further criticism of 'the tendency to simplify and generalize': 'The same tendency ... produces a still greater disinclination to allow of modifications, limitations, and exceptions to any rule or proposition, than to admit the operation of more causes than one. Nothing indeed is so unsatisfactory, and gives so unscientific and unmasterly an air to a proposition as to be obliged to make admissions of this kind; yet ... there are many important propositions in political economy which absolutely require limitations and exceptions' (1820, 7-8; 1836, 6). Here Malthus summarizes with the observation that the complexity introduced by multicausality - and also by mutual cause-effect relations - supplemented by the problem of 'limitations and exceptions' to any general proposition, accounted for 'frequent' failures of prediction: 'It may be confidently stated that the frequent combination of complicated causes, the actions and reactions of cause and effect on each other, and the necessity of limitations and exceptions in a considerable number of important propositions, form the main difficulties of the science, and occasion those frequent mistakes which it must be allowed are made in the prediction of results' (1820, 8; 1836, 6).16 'Mistakes in prediction,' one is led to believe, need not imply

15 An important instance is provided by Malthus's early objections to a defence of Bank of England policy on the grounds that the foreign exchanges had nothing to do with currency, since an 'improving exchange' frequently coincided with an increasing issue of notes, and a deterioration with note contraction (18113/1986, 7, 42; see above, chapter 14, p. 685). Improvements in the exchange might occur because of 'mercantile transactions' despite pressure on the exchange in the opposite direction created by excess paper issues. Ricardo reacted in precisely the same way in 1819 (see Hollander, 1979,459)-

978 CONCLUSION

error in the theory itself. And the problem of evaluating the verdict is not minimized: 'Where unforseen causes may possibly be in operation, and the causes that are foreseen are liable to great variations in their strength and efficacy, an accurate yet comprehensive attention to facts is necessary, both to prevent the multiplication of erroneous theories, and to confirm and sanction those that are just' (1820, 11-12; 1836, 9). That 'failure' of prediction need not be definitive requires further illustration. There is allusion to the generation of specific forecasts as one of the practical purposes of theoretical analysis - namely, '[to] trace distinctly the operations of that circle of causes and effects in political economy which are acting and re-acting on each other, so as to foresee their results, and lay down general rules' (1820, 16; 1836, 13). But 'forecasting' does not take centre stage, since '[in] many cases ... it may not be possible to predict results with certainty, on account of the complication of the causes in action, the different degrees of strength and efficacy with which they may operate, and the number of unforeseen circumstances which are likely to interfere' (1820, 17; 1836, 13). The role of theory is rather to allow the classification of alternative outcomes depending on circumstances: 'But it is surely knowledge of the highest importance to be able to draw a line, with tolerable precision, between those cases where the expected results are certain, and those where they are doubtful; and further to be able satisfactorily to explain, in the latter case, the reasons of such uncertainty.' For, 'to know what can be done, and how to do it, is, beyond a doubt, the most valuable species of information.' Also important, theory defined what is ruled out: 'The next to it is, to know what cannot be done, and why we cannot do it. The first enables us to attain a positive good, to increase our powers, and augment our happiness: the second saves us from the evil of fruitless attempts, and the loss and misery occasioned by perpetual failure' (1820, 17; 1836, 13-14). All this is very much in line with Ricardo's perspective as is clear from his treatment of the Corn Law issue (see Hollander, 1979, ch. 11). Let us consider Mai thus's use of population theory from this perspective. The population expansion under way was, as we know from chapter 16, attributed to a fall in the mortality rate more than sufficient to compensate for an increase in the preventive checks - namely, a decline in the marriage and birth rates. The evidence, he insisted against Weyland, proved 'incontrovertibly that the actual checks to population, even in the most improved countries, arise principally from an insufficiency of subsistence, and soon yield to increased resources, notwithstanding the increase of towns and manufactories...' (see above, chapter 5, p. 200): or again 'Mr. Weyland really appears to have dictated his book with his eyes blindfolded, and his ears stopped ... The very slightest glance at different countries of Europe shows with a force amounting to demonstration that to all practical purposes the natural tendency of population to increase may be considered a given quantity; and that the actual increase is regulated by the varying

CONCLUSION 979

resources of each country for the employment and maintenance of labour, in whatever stage of its progress it may be, whether it is agricultural or manufacturing, whether it has few or many towns' (cited chapter 5, p. 203). But what would have constituted a 'refutation'? Had there been no positive population response to a relaxation of the food constraint, one might suppose. Yet if this could be accounted for by a sufficiently marked fall in the birth rate to outweigh the fall in mortality - and it will be recalled that Malthus rationalized improved prudence not only in terms of exogenous changes in prudential control, but as an endogenous variable involving the pressure exerted by a relative increase in corn prices (chapter 5: IV) - the model would be protected, and legitimately so. It is certain that Malthus did not see the contemporary upward trend in the real wage as in any way refuting his population doctrine. That doctrine served his primary purpose, which was to warn against policies or institutions that positively encouraged population growth, thereby liberating or encouraging the 'tendency' towards excess population growth.'6 This line of argument extends to the land scarcity-based growth or 'canonical' model itself. The evidence adduced by Malthus for the period 1793-1815 pointed to the significance of technical progress in preventing a rise in the real cost of producing food (see chapter 15: V, VI), and he made much of prospective productivity increase. Yet he did not abandon the land-scarcity model, and himself elaborated on the downward trend in the corn wage and profit rate, notwithstanding the actual upward trend of both, at least until the postwar depression. The procedure might seem irresponsible unless - as seems also to be the case for Ricardo - the primary purpose of model-building was seen to provide a framework for policy, indicating what can happen, rather than a technical organon designed to generate specific historical predictions.17 For all that, there are to be found loose 'predictions' of the course of events several decades, even a century ahead, in consequence of increasing land scarcity; and Mai thus's statements of diminishing agricultural returns we have found to be stronger than Ricardo's, incorporating as they often do improvement in technology (see, e.g., chapter 3, p. 105; 15, p. 748).l8

16 Poor relief was a conspicuous concern. Other illustrations are provided by our discussion of Malthus on emigration and public works (chapter 18: VII). He was warning of the potential danger emanating from excessive population growth in reaction to improved standards which had to be considered in devising social policy, not positively predicting such an outcome. 17 For an illustration of this orientation see above, section II, on the implications of the analysis entailed in interpreting the profit-rate differential in the periods 1793-1813 and 1727-57. 18 But here again there is no consistency of practice; see chapter 5, p. 194.

980 CONCLUSION VI

THE 'DOCTRINE OF PROPORTIONS': POLITICAL ECONOMY AND MATHEMATICS

Two important examples illustrate the necessity to allow for 'limitations and exceptions' to general rules (above, section II), one relating to savings and the other to property distribution, both with respect to economic growth. As for the first, Mai thus had in mind Smith's general proposition - this provides further illustration of Malthus's concern with Smithian strong statements - 'that capitals are increased by parsimony,' 'that every frugal man is a public benefactor' (1776/1937, 321, 324) or that increase of wealth depends upon the balance of produce above consumption: 'That these propositions are true to a great extent is perfectly unquestionable. No considerable and continued increase of wealth could possibly take place without that degree of frugality which occasions, annually, the conversion of some revenue into capital, and creates a balance of produce above consumption' (1820, 8; 1836, 6). The 'limitation' of the Smithian propositions — that they were 'not true to an indefinite extent' - reflected the fact that 'the principle of saving, pushed to excess, would destroy the motive to production.' In brief: 'If consumption exceed production, the capital of the country must be diminished, and its wealth must be gradually destroyed from its want of power to produce; if production be in a great excess above consumption, the motive to accumulate and produce must cease from the want of will to consume [1836: from the want of an effectual demand in those who have the principal means of purchasing]. The two extremes are obvious; and it follows that there must be some intermediate point, though the resources of political economy may not be able to ascertain it, where, taking into consideration both the power to produce and the will to consume, the encouragement to the increase of wealth is the greatest' (1820, 9; 1836, 7). Malthus alludes here to the so-called Doctrine of Proportions.19 A second example of the necessity for allowing 'limitations and exceptions' to general rules, and one which also involves the problem of 19 Ricardo protested in his Note 2 that there was no dispute regarding the requirement for capital accumulation if growth is to proceed, and also none regarding the possibility that the motive to accumulate may weaken (1951-73, II, 8-9). But he realized that the main issue was not reduced 'motive' as such, but such a reduction that reflects specifically Malthusian non-sustainable growth entailing excess commodity supply, excess capacity, and unemployment rather than the labour scarcity that he, Ricardo, so readily allowed: 'Mr. Malthus will be found to maintain not only the opinion, which is just, that the profits of the capitalist will be diminished by an increase of productions under the circumstances supposed; but also the opinion which is wholly inconsistent with it that the wages of the labourer will be likewise reduced' (9). To him, Malthus's position was incomprehensible: 'Productions altogether are increased, a selection may be freely made what those productions shall be, and yet neither the capitalist nor the labourer shall be benefited by them, altho they must be awarded to one or other of them.'

CONCLUSION 981

defining optimal positions, involves the ideal division of property from the perspective of growth: 'There is here ... a point as well as in the other instance, though we may not know how to place it, where the division of property is best suited to the actual circumstances of the society, and calculated to give the best stimulus to production and to the increase of wealth and population' (1820, 9-10; 1836, 7-8). It followed then 'that no general rule can be laid down respecting the advantage to be derived from saving, or the division of property, without limitations and exceptions.' Moreover, the problem of defining 'optima' - the characteristic that 'the most advantageous mean cannot be marked' - meant that 'effects may be produced by an unnoticed approximation to this middle point, which are attributed to other causes, and lead to false conclusions.' The significance of property distribution for economic growth is much elaborated in the Principles with this complexity in mind (see above, chapter 11: XII). 20 While a greater degree of equality was advisable from the perspective of aggregate demand, 'beyond a certain extent' - and considered from the supply side - the effect would be damaging. In general terms, 'there is a certain elevation at which the projectile will go the farthest; but if it be directed either higher or lower, it will fall short (1820, 431-2; 1836, 375). In the case at hand: 'With a comparatively small proportion of rich proprietors, who would prefer menial service [1836: menial servants, retainers] and territorial influence to an excessive quantity of manufactured and mercantile products, the power [1836: among capitalists] of supplying the results of productive labour would be much greater than the will to consume them, and the progress of wealth would be checked by the want of effective [1836: effectual] demand. With an excessive proportion of small proprietors both of land and capital, all great improvements on the land, all great enterprises in commerce and manufactures, and all the wonders [1836: most of the wonders] described by Adam Smith, as resulting from the division of labour, would be at an end; and the progress of wealth would be checked by a failure in the powers of supply' (1820, 432; 1836, 375-6). Malthus was somewhat more specific: 'If the demand be great, independently of the land, a slight diminution in the power of production may turn the scale, and any change which is unfavourable to accumulation, enterprise, and the division of labour, will be unfavourable to the progress of wealth. But if the country be ill situated for foreign commerce, and its tastes, habits, and internal communications be such as not to encourage an active home trade nothing can occasion

20 An early instance of the approach is to be found on the Essay on Population: 'allowing, with the moderns, all the advantages of luxury, and when they fall short of actual vice, they are certainly great; there seems to be a point, beyond which it must necessarily become prejudicial to a state, and bring with it the seeds of weakness and decay' (1803/1986, 3, 68yn; 1806, II, 2?4n).

982 CONCLUSION

an adequate demand for produce, but an easy subdivision of landed property ...' (1820, 439~40; 1836, 382). A related instance involves the magnitude of the 'unproductive' sector from the perspective of growth (chapter 11: XIII). The problem is spelled out at the outset of Section IX of the chapter on Progress: 'What the proportion is between the productive and unproductive classes of a society, [1836: the productive labourers and those engaged in personal services,] which affords the greatest encouragement to the continued increase of wealth, it has before been said that the resources of political economy are unequal to determine. It must depend upon a great variety of circumstances, particularly upon the fertility of the soil and the progress of invention in machinery. A fertile soil and an ingenious people can not only support a considerable proportion of unproductive consumers without injury [1836: support without injury a considerable proportion of consumers not directly productive of material wealth,] but may absolutely require such a body of demanders, in order to give effect to their [1836: the] powers of production. While, with a poor soil and a people of little ingenuity, an attempt to support such a body would throw land out of cultivation, and lead infallibly to impoverishment and ruin'(1820, 464; 1836, 399). In addition: 'Another cause, which makes it impossible to say what proportion of the unproductive to the productive classes [1836: what proportion of consumers directly productive to those not directly productive] is most favourable to the increase of wealth, is the difference in the degree of consumption which may prevail among the producers themselves.' And a statement regarding the role of 'the unproductive classes' in terms of the 'doctrine of proportions' closes Malthus's Section IX: 'Their specific use in encouraging wealth is, to maintain such a balance between produce and consumption as to give the greatest exchangeable value to the results of the national industry. [1836: On the whole it may be observed, that the specific use of a body of unproductive consumers, is to give encouragement to wealth by maintaining a balance between produce and consumption as will give the greatest exchangeable value to the results of national industry.] If unproductive labour [1836: such consumers] were to predominate, the comparatively small quantity of material products brought to market would keep down the value of the whole produce, from the deficiency of quantity. If [1836: If, on the other hand,] the productive classes were in excess, the value of the whole produce would fall from excess of supply. It is obviously [1836: There is therefore] a certain proportion between the two which will yield the greatest value, and command [1836: and command for a continuance] the greatest quantity of domestic and foreign labour [1836: of labour]; ...' (1820, 489; 1836, 412-13). The foregoing perspective governed Malthus's approach to the national debt (see above, chapter 13: V). The positive effect on aggregate demand of the growth of the national debt in the past had exceeded the negative effect from the supply side; there was no such assurance for the future. But

CONCLUSION 983

Malthus did offer evaluations of the relevant circumstances, in the present instance specifying that, notwithstanding his concern with the taxation burden of financing the debt in the peculiar conditions faced by Britain, repayment (such as Ricardo recommended) would entail unacceptable dangers of demand contraction. The doctrine of proportions is generalized: 'It will be found, I believe, true that all the great results in political economy, respecting wealth, depend upon proportions,' though there is no part of the whole subject, where the efficacy of proportions in the production of wealth is so strikingly exemplified, as in the division of landed and other property' (1820, 432-3; 1836, 376). The 1836 version generalizes further: 'It is not, however, in political economy alone that so much depends upon proportions, but throughout the whole range of nature and art.' In both versions responsibility for failures of prediction is attributed in part to neglect of the characteristic: 'it is from overlooking this most important truth, that so many errors have prevailed in the prediction of consequences; that nations have sometimes been enriched when it was expected that they would be impoverished, and impoverished when it was expected that they would be enriched; and that such contradictory opinions have occasionally prevailed respecting the most effective encouragements to the increase of wealth.' (A note in the second edition illustrates from the predictions made during the war 'of the abundant wealth which would be the immediate result of the peace.') The characteristic problem of'proportions' introduced 'a kind of uncertainty over the science of political economy' (1820, 515; 1836, 432). But if 'the doctrine should be found, upon sufficient examination, to be true; if it adequately accounts for things as they are, and explains consistently why frequent mistakes have been made respecting the future, it will be allowed that such objectors are answered. We cannot make a science more certain by our wishes or opinions; but we may obviously make it much more uncertain in its application, by believing it to be what it is not.' Malthus deserves credit for his attempts to specify where possible the outcome of the balance in specific cases. None the less, in one major respect the problem of proportions seems to have paralysed him. For a primary practical outcome of the perspective in the context of sustainable growth is that savings decisions must be left to the free market: 'Saving ... is, in numerous instances, a most sacred private duty,' but whether the rate of accumulation 'if let alone, be ever too great or not, no one could think of interfering with it, even in its caprices' (1820, 517; 1836, 434; see chapter 12, p. 615). Malthus, in fact, has replaced Smith's clear-cut rule that increased savings is a national benefit by another unambiguous rule - that of laissez-faire with respect to accumulation. It comes as something of an anti-climax. (See further, below, p. 1003.)

984 CONCLUSION

Malthus, we have just seen, allowed that the problem of 'proportions' introduced 'a kind of uncertainty over the science of political economy.' In the same context, at the close of the Principles (1820, 518; 1836, 434), he reiterated almost verbatim the famous declaration of the Introduction, that 'the science of political economy bears a nearer resemblance to the science of morals and politics, than to that of mathematics': It has been said, and perhaps with truth, that the conclusions of Political Economy partake more of the certainty of the stricter sciences than those of most of the other branches of human knowledge. Yet we should fall into a serious error if we were to suppose that any propositions, the practical results of which depend upon the agency of so variable a being as man, and the qualities of so variable a compound as the soil, can ever admit of the same kinds of proof, or lead to the same certain conclusions, as those which relate to figure and number. There are indeed in political economy great general principles, to which exceptions are of the most rare occurrence, and prominent land-marks which may almost always be depended upon as safe guides; but even these, when examined, will be found to resemble in most particulars the great general rules in morals and politics founded upon the known passions and propensities of human nature: and whether we advert to the qualities of man, or of the earth he is destined to cultivate, we shall be compelled to acknowledge, that the science of political economy bears a nearer resemblance to the science of morals and politics than to that of mathematics. (1820, 1-2; 1836, i)

The emphasis here is on the difficulties of proof in economics and, above all, the uncertainty of its conclusions compared with 'the stricter sciences.' This confirms the outcome of our preceding sections, that the main message Malthus intended to convey by his striking formulations was that, characteristically, economics did not typically generate general and universally applicable practical rules, particularly rules pertaining to policy, a restriction that flowed in part from the allowance that had to be made for aggregate-demand in addition to aggregate-supply constraints. The problem reflects the complexity of economics, though at no time did Malthus cast aspersions on deductive theorizing as such. Indeed, the fact is that Malthus did not even object to the use of mathematical tools in economic theory. He was, of course, engaged in formulating behavioural and technological relations and theorems of various sorts, as is so apparent in the treatment of growth; he was evidently comfortable with mathematical formulas, especially in the demographic context;21 and he relished mechanical analogies. A striking instance is the reservoir analogy used in support of the geometric and arithmetic ratios (see chapter i, p. 31). A 21 Cf. 1986, 2, 256 regarding a 'general formula for estimating the population of a country at any distance from a certain period, under given circumstances of births and mortality,' citing Bridge (1810).

CONCLUSION 985 second is that between the downward trend of the profit rate attributable to increasing land scarcity, and the value of long-term annuities (see chapter 10, p. 471). Thus even his objections to Ricardo's (supposed) neglect of all other considerations are formulated mathematically: 'The value of the government long annuities has a natural and inevitable [1836: constant] tendency to diminish as they approach nearer and nearer to the end of the term for which they were granted [1836: approach towards the term for which they were granted] ... [But] it would be a most erroneous calculation to estimate the value of this kind of stock solely by the number of years which it would have to run [1836: sentence omitted]. It is well known that out of the comparatively short term of ninety years, so large a proportion as twenty has sometimes elapsed, not only without any diminution, but with an actual increase of [1836: their] value' (1820, 307-8; 1836, 281).22 This same perspecitve is also encountered in the mechanical analogy brought to counter Ricardo's supposedly monocausal theory of the profit rate (above, pp. 966-7). All this might be considered in the nature of circumstantial evidence. But, Malthus himself confirms this reading, for he wrote to Whewell upon receipt of the latter's Mathematical Exposition of Some Doctrines of Political Economy (1829): 'I think ... that you have arrived at pretty just conclusions, and am inclined to infer from what I have seen, that mathematical calculations may in some cases be introduced with advantage into the science of Political Economy particularly with a view to determine the different degrees in which certain objects are affected, under different hypotheses' (TCL Add. Ms. a.20910; de Marchi and Sturges, 1973, 387). But, as for practice, the true problem was one of estimation: 'The grand difficulty, however, with a view to practicability, is the getting data to work with, sufficiently near the truth, such as can be stated distinctly in mathematical language. In many cases where one should wish to come to definite conclusions I should fear this was quite impracticable.'23 Moreover, a conceptual mathematical maximization procedure was at play in specifying, at least in principle, appropriate policy: 'I have long thought that there are many of the results in political economy which have some resemblance to the problems de maximis et minimis, such as the

22 In 1836 this passage continues in an elaboration of the bond analogy. That elaboration occurs in 1820 later in the section. The substance is the same: To recur to the illustration already used - as the Long Annuities approach nearer and nearer to the term at which they expire, their value must necessarily so diminish, on this account alone, that no demand arising from plenty of money could possibly keep up their value' (1820, 312); 'when, however, they approach near to the term at which they expire, they must necessarily so diminish in value on this account alone, that no demand arising from plenty of money could possibly keep up their price' (1836, 281). 23 Jevons was more optimistic, referring to 'the long course of scientific progress [when] a sufficient supply of suitable statistics has been at length obtained' (1879, 148)«

986 CONCLUSION

most favourable division of landed property, neither too great nor too small; and the most advantageous proportions (with a view to the permanent increase of wealth) in which the whole produce of capital should be divided between the capitalists and the labourers.' Here, then, Malthus recognized that his 'principle of proportions' itself invited the optimization procedures of the calculus, though he could 'not see how such propositions could be put into the proper language for a fluxional solution, varying as the results must do with the fertility of the soils and the productiveness of capital.' It follows from all this that the denial of a parallel between political economy and mathematics (and insistence on its resemblance with 'morals and polities') not only does not imply rejection of mathematics in economic theory, but, to the contrary, sees mathematics - more specifically the calculus - as (potentially) the appropriate procedure in dealing with the 'principle of proportions.' The statement sought only to convey a denial of simple, generally applicable, rules of thumb, such as those flowing from theoretical structures which allowed only for supply-side constraints. A word regarding Ricardo's reaction to Malthus's published statement on the contrast between economics and mathematics: 'Another of his great mistakes,' he wrote to James Mill, 'is I think this; Political Economy he says is not a strict science like the mathematics ...' (i January 1821; 1951-73, VIII, 331). Ricardo proceeded to complain that 'therefore he thinks he may use words in a vague way, sometimes attaching one meaning to them, sometimes another and quite different. No proposition can be more absurd.' Precisely what Ricardo intended is unclear.24 There is some validity to Ricardo's charge regarding loose use of terminology, but it scarcely reflects accurately the formal constrast with mathematics, since Malthus did not in fact deny a role for mathematics in economics. VII

THE CHARGE OF 'INCONSISTENCY' AND RELATED MATTERS

The 'doctrine of proportions' cannot be adduced in exoneration of the criticisms that have been levelled against Malthus on grounds of consistency, though we readily allow that his task was particularly onerous.25 It 24 The objection apparently turns on Say's Law: 'In all those cases where [in discussion] he has advanced one proposition in which he says he differs with you, Say and me, and has actually endeavoured to prove another, which we should not dispute, he appears to me to hold the proposition which he does prove to be identical with the one not proved; the error therefore is in his language, he appears to me not to be aware of the import of the words which he uses - they convey a totally different meaning to his mind, and to mine!' 25 There is, however, considerable justification for Pullen's observation that the accusations of 'muddled thinking' appear to have been exaggerated and unjustified, because Malthus's critics have been unaware of, or have not properly recognized, his doctrine of proportions (1982, 270).

CONCLUSION 987

is primarily the denial of, and attempt to disprove, Say's Law in the industrial sector that introduces the peculiar complexity absent from Ricardo's system - not the demand-supply approach to price or variable corn wages in the growth context, both of which were insisted upon by Ricardo. The problem Malthus faced was exacerbated by the need to combine his allowance for potential deviations between aggregate demand and supply with the land-scarcity approach to the agricultural sector - the 'canonical' perspective. He certainly struggled with the differential treatment of the two sectors for years, as we saw in Part I, reaching some kind of resolution in the Principles in the corn-profit model (chapter 10: III, IV). Whatever one may think of this resolution, the fact is that it makes no appearance in the formal analysis of sustainable growth undertaken in the chapter on Progress, which proceeds largely by simply setting the 'canonical' issues aside (see chapter n).26 Nevertheless, we must avoid the conclusion that Malthus proceeded on principle without attention to 'system' and the desirability of achieving a consistent unity (see above, section II). If there are logical inconsistencies and loose ends, they must be frankly recognized as weaknesses, whereas too often failures of reconciliation have been justified as inherent in a peculiar methodology represented as preferable to Ricardo's. Malthus was himself dissatisfied with his Principles. The delayed publication, the revisions commenced before the ink was dry, the failure to complete the second edition - all are indicative. Some simple data establish the initial hesitancy. On 12 October 1817, Malthus first intimated to Ricardo his planned volume: 'I am meditating another volume but hardly know what to call it' (in Ricardo, 1951-73, VII, 194); and again on 3 December: 'I am meditating a volume as I believe I have told you, and I want to answer you, without giving my work a controversial air. Can you tell me how to manage this' (215). (Ricardo understood the request as relating to an appropriate title and to matters of organization, not substance, and left it to Malthus; 16 December, 222.) On 30 March 1818, he reported to Prevost on his work, mentioning that 'in this I shall advert frequently to Mr. Ricardo's work' (II, vii). In the second half of 1818, he read parts of the manuscript to Ricardo (VII, 284, 372); but he complained on 16 August that his progress was slow (279), and again on 21 October: 'I am going on with my volume, though slowly, and with more interruptions than I intended or expected. I boggle ever at the tide; and it is not till after some delay and difficulty, that I have at length determined upon

26 To that extent it would be correct to say that 'land scarcity and diminishing returns are ... not integrated with "effective demand" into a coherent model' (Waterman, icjCjGb). Malthus's letter to Ricardo of 16 July 1821 contains an illusive comment relating 'the fertility of the soil' with the degree of 'unproductive consumption' required to assure sustainable growth (cited chapter 11, pp. 519-21).

988 CONCLUSION

'The Principles of Political Economy considered, with a view to their practical application" ... But though I have at length determined on what I am going to write about, I doubt whether I shall finish this spring' (312). An announcement in fact appeared on 10 November 1818 in the Monthly Literary Advertiser that this title was in press (329n). In December 1818, Ricardo reported to Trower, and to James Mill, Malthus's intimation to him that the book would not appear till the end of 1819 (370, 376). As we remarked at the outset of this book, the delay, Ricardo believed, reflected in part 'doubts which he cannot help entertaining of the correctness of his opinions.' Nearly a year later, Malthus was still struggling to complete the manuscript, and himself explained the delay by lack of confidence, confirming Ricardo's suspicions,27 and by the disparate periods of composition: 'I have been saying in my introduction, that my work has been delayed by my respect for your authority, and the fear that I must have overlooked some essential points either in your view of the subject or in my own. But though I have been lately finishing the beginning, I have by no means arrived at the end. I think I have a fourth or fifth to write yet; and having composed the different parts at different times and not in their natural order, I have still much to put out and put in, before it will be fit to send to the press. I can hardly expect to be out before February or March' (10 September 1819; VIII, 65-66; see also Malthus, 1820, 24, for the final formulation) ,28 It is clear that Malthus was troubled by his own deficiency in system building - vide the comment on 'natural order.' The process of revision began almost immediately after the appearance of the volume early in April 1820 and is alluded to as early as 26 October: 'I am preparing a new edition and shall be glad of any corrections and suggestions which you will give both in reference to those parts which relate to you, and many others'(to Ricardo; VIII, 285). The revisions were never fully completed.

Malthus's own admission that he had not managed to develop a 'system' in his Principles, that the different chapters had been composed at different

27 Malthus from the start expressed concern not to offend Ricardo, as is clear from the following comment on a detail in his first Edinburgh Review article: 'I was sorry to find a small monosyllable put into the [February 1811] article either by Jeffrey or by accident, which made a considerable alteration in the sense, and may have offended Mr. Ricardo in some degree justly. I had said "We do not think these facts are all satisfactorily explicable upon the principles of Mr. Ricardo alone," - it is printed at all, and makes a good deal of difference' (to Horner, 7 April 1811; in Ricardo, 1951-73, III, 12). 28 Early in November 1819, the Monthly Literary Advisor announced the Principles as forthcoming shortly (VIII, 138), and the book finally appeared early in April 1820.

CONCLUSION 989

times and were inadequately collated, coupled with his hesitancy and doubt lends some circumstantial support for the validity of the charge of inconsistency levelled against him. Here, we follow up this and related charges, extending our investigation quite generally. We start with Ricardo's primary objection to the protectionist case in Grounds of an Opinion. Ricardo complained, not of the protectionism as such: 'You are avowedly for restrictions on importation; of that I do not complain. It is not easy to estimate justly the dangers to which we may be exposed ... It is a most difficult point to calculate these dangers at their fair value'; his objection was rather to Malthus's appeal to principles inconsistent with the theory of allocation adopted elsewhere: 'in an economical view, altho' you have here and there allowed that we might be benefited by importing cheap, rather than by growing dear - you point out many inconveniences which we should suffer from the loss of agricultural capital, and from other causes; which would make it appear as if even economically you thought we ought [not] to import corn, — such is the approbation with which you quote from Adam Smith of the benefits of agriculture over commerce in increasing production, and which I cannot help thinking, is at variance with all your general doctrines' (letter dated 13 February 1815; 1951-73, VI, 177-8; emphasis added). This reaction to the Grounds- it also applies at least to the 1820 edition of the Principles — that the case for protection reflected in part the analytical notion of superior agricultural productivity and was 'at variance with all [Malthus's] general doctrines' is perfectly valid. And it is difficult to appreciate how it was that Malthus took Adam Smith severely to task for extracting corn from the usual demand-supply mechanism (above, p. 974), while he himself did the very same. Moreover, the rationale for the distinct character of corn turned on an immediate population reaction to increased supplies of corn - again this is to be found in the Wealth of Nations and was much admired by James Mill (see above, p. 970) - which is at variance with the claim of the superiority of a method that allows for shortrun and lagged reactions. The problem is further compounded by the adoption of the scarcity approach implicit in the diminishing-returns conception while singing the praises of the agricultural surplus (see chapter 8: VII-IX). Inconsistencies reflecting the simultaneous subscription to conflicting paradigms - scarcity-oriented versus surplus-oriented paradigms — thus pervade Malthus's economics (as to some degree they affect the Wealth of Nations, considering Smith's agricultural bias), though it is to Malthus's credit that he ultimately came to abandon much of the physiocratic perspective. Mention should be made here of Ricardo's frustration at Malthus's rejection in 1820 of the notion of no-rent marginal produce - despite his elaboration of the phenomenon in 1814/15 (see chapter 4, pp. 170-1); and, we should add, despite its subsequent reappearance in the discussion of the inverse wage-profit relation, and throughout The Measure of Value

990 CONCLUSION

(see chapter 6: VIII; 7: VIII; 8: IX). Other valid charges relate to his failure to stay consistently with his own preferred measure of value (chapter 4: note 91). There is a switching back and forth regarding the priority of food and population (chapter 5: IX), though the application of the Law of Markets to food turned crucially on the priority of food. Most serious is the fact that the notion of a proportionate response of population to food undermines the treatment of the wage as a policy parameter (see chapter 8: XI). And there are the contradictory approaches to labour demand documented in chapter 9. Robert Torrens formulated the complaint with an alteration of emphasis. He represented Malthus as 'appearing] as the ingenious opponent of the new theory of profit, which may be traced by a process of reasoning, self-evident in all its steps, from those discoveries respecting the nature and origin of rent which he himself has made' (1821, xii—xiii); and - looked at from the reverse angle - appearing (like Priestley) 'as the pertinacious champion of the theories which the facts established by himself had so largely contributed to overthrow' (xiii).29 To read Malthus - as Torrens did - as positively rejecting the land scarcity-based growth model is unjustified, as we have made abundantly clear throughout this work, but it is true that he worked with concepts opposed to it. Torrens's complaint illustrates the 1815 charge of characteristic inconsistency (see the Introduction, pp. 6-7). Other aspects of his objection are less convincing. First, he found that Malthus used the population principle - derived in fact from Wallace - to confute Godwin and Condorcet on the grounds that, were moral restraint practised (as a feature of the perfectibility of man), it would be undermined by population pressure; and then proceeded to admit that population growth might be checked by moral restraint (1815, ix). This is a false charge, since it neglects the different institutions in the two cases - communism versus private property, including marriage -with their differential behavioural patterns (see chapter 19, P- 939)- Second, he pointed to Malthus's support of corn-export bounties in the Essay on Population, whereas the 1814 Observation 'states the impossibility of England's becoming an exporting country' (x). Again, this is an invalid objection; Malthus is clear that empirical conditions had altered since the early iSoos (see chapter 15, pp. 751-2). The third illustration involves the Bullion controversy (x-xi). Malthus in 1810-11 had ascribed the deviation of the value of paper from coin to an excessive issue of paper rather than to an extraordinary increase in the Continental demand for the metal; in Grounds of an Opinion (1815), he maintained that paper had since risen in value despite increased note supply (and attributed part of the remaining differential to a high bullion value in Europe). (See chapter

2Q Pullen (in Malthus, 1820/1989, II, 289) points to the irony of Torrens's comparison since Malthus himself had been critical of Priestley (see above, note 4).

CONCLUSION 991

13, p. 655) But Torrens neglected to allow for Malthus's specification of the circumstances ruling in 1815 - changes in ceteris paribus conditions, including failure of country banks - such that 'increased issues might take place, accompanied even by a rise of value.'30 Francis Horner was upset at what he perceived to be the support now seemingly afforded by Malthus to the anti-Bullionists by a re-evaluation of the wartime experience: 'how I grudge my adversaries on the bullion question the lift you have given them. Surely your corn zeal lessened too much in your eyes, for the moment, the magnitude of that evil' (12 February 1815; 1853, H> 228). Malthus in reply insisted that a 'much greater part of the [wartime] difference between bullion and paper was occasioned by commercial causes and a peculiar demand for the precious metals, than was supposed by the Bullionists in general ...' (16 February).31 His uncompromising response insists on a sound factual basis for theory; and reflects favourably on his own intellectual independence: 'If I have given our adversaries a lift on the bullion question, I really cannot help it. My object is the truth; and I should think myself a very bad theorist, and quite unworthy to be attended to if I did not keep myself always open to the lessons of experience. I consider what has happened since the Bank Restrictions as a very curious and instructive series of facts, tending to throw great light on the theory of paper money and the causes that effect [sic] the price of bullion.' Ricardo came to Malthus's defence in 1815 against the charge of inconsistency by Horner as far as it relates to the monetary issue, recalling that Malthus had 'always held the opinion ... that the difference between the value of gold and paper was partly owing to the rise of gold' (27 March 1815; 1951-73, VI, 205). He was less tolerant when Malthus in 1820 maintained that there had occurred an actual fall in the domestic value of bullion between 1793 and 1813, thus adding to the responsibility of the Bank (above, chapter 13, p. 660); for Ricardo had in mind the opinion given by Malthus himself in the Introduction to his Principles that both of the current theories accounting for an unfavourable exchange were valid, the truth lying between the parties to the dispute - illustrating the preference for multicausal approaches. Ricardo thus charged Malthus with failing

30 Malthus himself complained of the charges in a letter to Ricardo: 'Do you know whether Torrens is much read. I think he has treated me unjustly in the preface and that the instances of inconsistency which he produces, even if established, would by no means warrent his sweeping accusation' (24 March 1815; in Ricardo, 1951-73, VI, 201). Ricardo agreed: 'I am decidedly of opinion that Torrens has treated you unjustly in his remarks in the preface to his book. But if he be right in all, the instances are much too few to justify his severe observation' (27 March; 205). 31 Horner, 1994, 822.

992 CONCLUSION

to live up to his own rules. But the fact is that, even in 1811. Malthus had reacted as forcefully as Ricardo himself against the Bank of England, representing the anti-inflation case as soundly based on valid theoretical principles (above, p. 954); very litde had been allowed the Bank defenders. And with the passage of time an even stronger anti-Bullionist diagnosis seemed appropriate. This does not necessarily undermine a general presumption in favour of multicausality.32 (It is true, though, that the illustration in the Introduction is misleading.) Malthus's reputation for inconsistency in part reflects the fact that his protectionist position of 1815 was seen as a novelty conflicting with an earlier free-trade position. Empson reported in 1837 that Malthus had been aware of the risk to his reputation created by his support for the Corn Laws in 1815 (in Semmel, 1963, 258). An example of the reaction at that time is Francis Horner's letter to Murray: 'The most important convert the landholders have got is Malthus, who has now declared himself in favour of their [Corn] Bill; and, to be sure, there is not a better or more informed judgment, and it is the single authority which staggers me' (30 January 1815; in 1853, H> 221-2).3S More generally, as James has written: 'To the astonishment and consternation of his friends, Malthus's "Opinion" was that the importation of grain should be restricted, on the lines proposed by the government. It says much for all concerned that Malthus's outrageous heresy and disloyalty - for so it was regarded - did not affect his private friendships. Jeffrey, however, would never ask him again to contribute to the Edinburgh Review, except for an article oil Population in 1821' (James, 1979, 259)But why the astonishment and consternation? Malthus had expressed his protectionist sentiments distinctly in the second, third, and fourth editions of the Essay on Population, supporting the corn-export bounty in 1803 and import restraints in 1806. Was his earlier position unknown? This cannot be. And in fact Horner's letter continues: 'But those who have looked closely into his philosophy will admit that there is always a leaning in favour of the efficacy of laws; and his early bias was for corn laws in particular. It was a great effort of candour, in truth, to suspend his decision upon this particular measure so long' (Homer, 1853, II, 222). Conceivably, the earlier position had been out of sight long enough to be generally out of mind, a state of limbo that would have been reinforced by the extraordinarily balanced tone of the Observations in 1814 - although it is true that

32 It remains true, after all, that Malthus insisted on the validity of Thornton's case for exchange-rate variations reflecting non-monetary disturbances. Unfortunately, his own complaint against Ricardo's 'desire to simplify' is much exaggerated, since Ricardo, as we have shown, also allowed for the effect of non-monetary disturbances on the exchanges, a fact of which Malthus was well aware. 33 Malthus's Grounds appeared on 10 February. Horner must have seen the manuscript.

CONCLUSION 993 Malthus himself there recalled his position among the protectionists against Adam Smith at an earlier stage (1986, 7, 188). Possibly, considering his references to Malthus as a 'convert' who favoured 'their Bill' and 'this particular measure,' Horner's consternation turned on the support given what (except in starvation conditions) amounted to total import prohibition rather than some modest tariff. But there is a complexity - Malthus's letter to Horner of 16 June 1813 (above, pp. 72, 820). This letter implies support for a free corn trade - at least in principle - taking account of diminishing returns: 'England in reference to Europe may be considered as a large manufacturing district, with the natural tendency of such a district to import a considerable part of its corn, though with the power of growing it, if forced. In using this force, there is reason to believe that we shall check our manufactures, more than we shall increase our agriculture, and this it appears to me forms the true argument against the [corn law] system; an argument of great weight though we allow that an independent supply is practical by such means' (Tucker, 1954, 332). And we have seen that the Observations limits any potential advantages from protection to tariffs designed as correction for existing distortions. Malthus, in 1813-14, thus emerges, at least in private, as free-trader in contrast with his public protectionism 0/1806-7. That Horner had the letter of June 1813 in mind is by no means certain,34 but a possible change in orientation by Malthus must be allowed. As we have shown in chapter 17, (pp. 828-30), part of the protectionist case of 1815 turned on the perceived circumstance that the alternative was not free trade, considering actual and potential French export regulations. Genuine free trade was not an option, a position still consistent with abandonment of the early protectionism as a matter of principle in favour of a free-trade position. Against this, however, there is the longstanding notion of the superior productivity of agriculture, which ought to mitigate against a free corn trade. The 1813 letter thus remains problematic. But it is true that changing circumstances played some part in the chopping and changing; the alterations of position need not be entirely represented as a matter of inconsistency. And the subsequent story (fully documented in chapter 17) falls into line. Malthus's abandonment of agricultural protectionism in the 18205 follows from further perceived changes in the economic climate now promising genuine free trade, coupled, though, with a dilution of physiocratic bias, including the superior productivity of agriculture (and the case for balanced growth),

34 There is some reason to doubt it. In writing to Malthus (12 February 1815) he objected to the Grounds and the Inquiry for failing to draw the obvious policy conclusions from the principle of diminishing returns, and represented the principle itself as a novel contribution by Malthus, and the policy application as a novel contribution by himself (1853, II, 222-3). He had apparently forgotten the 1813 letter from Malthus.

994 CONCLUSION

under pressure both of superior logic and experience of industry as lead sector. A word on the population issue. Senior, it will be recalled, publicly admitted his misunderstanding of Malthus's use of the word 'tendency' to preclude the possibility of improvements in living standards; he had been 'led into this error principally by the conduct of all those writers who, since the appearance of your work, have written on Population. The multitudes who have followed, and the few who have endeavoured to oppose you, have all assumed this to be your opinion' (1829, 35> 56-71 see chapter 18, p. 914) ,35 Yet even Senior politely hints that Malthus had to take some responsibility for the misreading, since the harsh pronouncements commonly drawn regarding living standards were, 'before the appearance of your writings ... never hinted at' (81). And, in private correspondence he was far less accommodating: 'Mr. Malthus has not I think very clearly expressed his opinion - but if you ... will look at his correspondence with me you will find that he nearly abandoned or rather disavowed the doctrine that population has a uniform tendency (in the sense of probability) to exceed subsistence' (in Mallet, 1921, 305). Senior is here skating close to the assertion that Malthus had altered his position, which - were it true - would support Torrens's complaint. But that would be too harsh; Malthus was expressing a long-standing methodological stance, as we have argued in section V. VIII

THE RICARDO-MALTHUS RELATION REVIEWED

We must now seek to appreciate how the impression has been created of a profound divorce between Ricardian and Malthusian procedures when none exists. There is, in the first place, the valid complaint by Ricardo of Malthus's misunderstandings and misrepresentations of his position - that Malthus in his Principles had, though 'without intending it, misrepresented me in many particulars' (see Introduction, p. 6). Malthus was well aware of Ricardo's complaint, as is clear from a letter of 26 October 1820 (in Ricardo, 1951-73, VIII, 285). In response, Ricardo remarked: 'I am quite sure that you are the last man who would mistake an adversary, knowingly, yet I find in your book some allusions to opinions which you represent as mine and which I do not really hold. In one or two cases you I think furnish the proof that you have misapprehended me, for you represent my 35 Malthus confirmed this characteristic: 'It is quite true as Mr. Jones observes that I have been unfortunate in my followers. I trust he is aware that the general and practical conclusions which I have myself drawn from my principles both on population and rent, have by no means the gloomy aspects given to them by many of my readers' (Malthus to Whewell, 23 February 1831; William Whewell Papers, Trinity College, Cambridge, Add. Ms. c. 532).

CONCLUSION 995

doctrine one way in one place, and another way in another' (24 November 1820; 301). Several conspicuous instances upset Ricardo, with good reason. One relates to the effect of real-wage variation on the profit rate; another to the demand dimension in price determination. These two cases demonstrated for Malthus an unsatisfactory methodological orientation - the penchant for monocausality - which reduced the practical relevance of theory. The first we illustrate from Malthus's reaction to the Essay on Pro/its (1815): 'A writer may, to be sure, make any hypothesis he pleases; but if he supposes what is not true practically, he precludes himself from drawing any practical inference from his hypothesis. In your essay on profits you suppose the real wages of labour constant; but as they vary with every alteration in the prices of commodities, (while they remain nominally the same) and in reality are as variable as profits, there is no chance of your inferences being just as applied to the actual state of things' (26 January 1817; in Ricardo, 1951-73, VII, 122). Similarly, regarding Ricardo's Principles: To attempt to estimate the rate of profits in any country by a reference to this cause alone [diminishing agricultural returns], for ten, twenty, or even fifty years together, that is for periods of sufficient length to produce the most important effects on national prosperity, would inevitably lead to the greatest practical errors. Yet notwithstanding the utter inadequacy of this single cause to account for existing phenomena, Mr. Ricardo in his very ingenious chapter on profits, has dwelt on no other' (1820, 308; see chapter 10, p. 472); or again, the facts were 'diametrically opposed to the theory of profits founded on the natural quality of the last land taken into cultivation' (1820, 320; see chapter 15, p. 776). Ricardo immediately protested: 'Mr. Malthus here brings a charge against me which he would find it very difficult to prove. He has himself Page 294 Section I of this Chapter stated his causes for the fall of profits' - agricultural productivity and variable corn wages: 'I fully concur with him in thinking that profits never vary but from one or other of those causes' (Note 171; 1951-73, II, 264). As for the second formulation, he could scarcely contain himself: 'This is disingenuous. Who has advanced a "theory of profits founded on the natural quality of the last land taken into cultivation." The theory is that profits depend on the productiveness of the last land taken into cultivation, whether that productiveness be owing to the natural quality of the land, or the economy and skill with which labour may be applied to it. Profits are increased, either by diminishing the quantity of labour bestowed on the last land which yields a given produce, or by increasing the produce with a given quantity of labour. Mr. Malthus will I am sure not say that I have ever denied this principle - he will not say that I have not distincdy advanced it' (Note 177, 276-7). Malthus's errors regarding Ricardo are troublesome. But fortunately it seems that he came ultimately to correct at least some of them (see chapter 10, p. 473). For the second edition leaves unattributed the view that 'an

996 CONCLUSION

attempt to estimate the rate of profits in any country for ten or twenty years together by a reference to this cause alone, would lead to the greatest practical errors' (1836, 281), and abandons the alternative formulation (286) .36 The second instance of 'misrepresentation' relates to value theory. We may approach this matter by reference to a touching letter from Malthus: 'I want more particularly to talk to you about those parts of the subject where you think I have misconceived and mistaken you. You know I would not do it intentionally; but I think there may be some parts where the words will fairly bear out my construction, and yet you may not have intended to be so understood, in which case I may not be so much to blame ... [W]hen you reject the consideration of demand and supply in the price of commodities and refer only to the means of supply, you appear to me to look only at the half of your subject. No wealth can exist unless the demand, or the estimation in which the commodity is held exceeds the cost of production: and with regard to a vast mass of commodities does not the demand actually determine the cost?' (26 October 1820; in Ricardo, 1951-73, VIII, 285). Ricardo immediately protested: 'I have never disputed this' (24 November; 302). And again he explained his position, in this case the weight placed on production costs as the determinant of supply conditions in the face of changes in demand: 'I do not dispute either the influence of demand on the price of corn and on the price of other things, but supply follows close on its heels, and soon takes the power of regulating price in his own hands, and in regulating it he is determined by cost of production. I acknowledge the intervals on which you so exclusively dwell, but still they are only intervals.' All this was in line with his Principles, where Ricardo had spelled out the process of long-run cost determination of the corn price, assuming increases of demand in the face both of constant-cost and increasing-cost conditions (1951-73,1, 163). I suspect Ricardo's forms of expression designed to convey the 'primacy' of supply was responsible for part of the misunderstanding (see Hollander, 1991). But the fact that on at least one occasion in 1820 Malthus stated the Ricardian position fairly - recognizing the insistence on supply variation to assure cost determination of price (see chapter 7, p. 284) - raises the unfortunate possibility that he might sometimes have been playing games. (See above, pp. 475-6, where Malthus may be defending Ricardo against Jones on the matter of the shared incidence of diminishing agricultural returns, notwithstanding his common ascription to Ricardo of constant wages in the course of growth.) A third instance of 'misrepresentation' that sorely troubled Ricardo 36 Similar criticisms directed at Ricardo at 1820, 190 and 312, are left unascribed at 1836, 183 and 281. See also a letter dated 25 September 1820, where Malthus recognizes Ricardo's allowance of a fall in the profit rate 'temporarily from the improved condition of the labouring classes' (in Ricardo, 1951-73, VIII, 260).

CONCLUSION 997

relates to his chapter 'On Gross and Net Revenue' (above, chapter 11, pp. 574-5). Malthus read this chapter as arguing that a national advantage resulted from obtaining a given net income with a smaller workforce, notwithstanding a massive loss of employment. Ricardo protested that his sole objective was to argue that no social gain flowed from generating a given net revenue (of £5 million) by means of more rather than fewer men, having in mind specifically the magnitude of net revenue with an eye to national 'power': 'The employing a greater number of men would enable us neither to add a man to our army and navy, nor to contribute one guinea more in taxes' (1951-73, II, 381). He had no intention of recommending a policy involving actual creation of massive unemployment: 'Mr. Malthus supposes 7 million not to be required - that is changing my proposition not refuting it. M. Say has also remarked on this passage, and although I had carefully guarded myself, by the observation, that I was only answering Adam Smith's argument respecting the power of paying taxes &c., and was not considering what was undoubtedly on any other occasion most worthy of consideration, the happiness of so many human being, yet he speaks as if this consideration was wholly unimportant in my estimation. I assure him he has done me injustice ...' (382) .37 Malthus may have been induced to modify his text for the second edition as a result of this complaint (see above, chapter 11, 575). Even honest errors of interpretation would not preclude a propensity on Malthus's part to exaggerate the distinctiveness of his own methodology (above, section III). His case for realistic axioms was made out against Ricardo with little justification. Ricardo, after all, insisted that his behavioural assumptions would be inappropriate in an investigation of underdeveloped economies, and that in such cases policy deductions derived from a land scarcity-based theory would be irrelevant, indeed dangerous. And his case for the Law of Markets itself turned specifically on behaviour patterns pertinent to a specific time and space-bound reality. Similarly, Malthus's warnings (see above, pp. 968-9) against basing policy conclusions directly upon exercises in comparative statics - as in the analysis of technological improvements - were misdirected. The strategy of Ricardo's analysis of die consequences for employment of machinery in his Chapter 31 was clarified by Ricardo himself in terms fully consistent with Malthus's position: 'The statement which I have made will not, I hope, lead to the inference that machinery should not be encouraged. To elucidate the principle, I have been supposing, that improved machinery is suddenly discovered, and extensively used; but the truth is, that these discoveries are gradual, and rather operate in determining the employment of the capital which is saved and accumulated, than in diverting capital from its actual employment' (1951-73, I, 395). This reflects precisely the confessedly 37 See further on Malthus's misrepresentation, Hollander, 1979, 364-5, 367.

998 CONCLUSION

limited scope of the propositions derived in the Principles expressed in a famous letter of 4 May 1820: 'Our differences may in some respects ... be ascribed to your considering my book as more practical than I intended it to be. My object was to elucidate principles, and to do so I imagined strong cases that I might shew the operation of those principles. I never thought for example that practically any improvements take place on the land which would at once double the produce, but to shew what the effects of improvement would be undisturbed by any other operating cause, I supposed an improvement to that extent to be adopted, and I think I have reasoned correctly from such premises' (1951-73, VIII, 184). Ricardo's famous lament of 1815 that 'we so materially differ' may also have given an impression of a deep divide: 'If I am too theoretical which I really believe is the case, - you I think are too practical. There are so many combinations, - so many operating causes in Political Economy, that there is a great danger in appealing to experience in favour of a particular doctrine, unless we are sure that all the causes of variation are seen and their effects are duly estimated' (7 October 1815; 1951-73, VI, 295). But Ricardo must have been fooled by Malthus's continual lip-service to 'experience' when in fact he was as deductive as Ricardo, and justified modelbuilding on precisely the same grounds. Ricardo, in fact, attempted to meet Malthus halfway as far as concerned their methodological priorities. He had earlier pointed out when analysing the outcome of given changes in conditions that he, unlike Malthus, typically concerned himself with the long-run effects, though conceding that ideally both short-run and long-run effects had to be considered: 'It appears to me that one great cause of our difference in opinion, on the subject we have so often discussed, is that you have always in mind the immediate and temporary effects of particular changes - whereas I put these imediate and temporary effects quite aside, and fix my whole attention on the permanent state of things which will result from them. Perhaps you estimate these temporary effects too highly, whilst I am too much disposed to undervalue them. To manage the subject quite right they should be carefully distinguished and mentioned, and the due effects ascribed to each' (24 January 1817; in Ricardo, 1951-73, VII, 120). This celebrated contrast starts out in stark and exclusive terms, but ends as a differential weighting of preoccupation. And this latter seems valid. The fact is that Ricardo did concern himself with the short-run effects of given disturbances - it was, after all, Ricardo who proposed a procedure for avoiding too sudden a return to gold (extending even to making out a possible case for devaluation), and who recommended the gradual repeal of the Corn Laws. As for Malthus, he agreed with Ricardo that 'one cause of our difference in opinion is that which you mention' (26 January 1817; 121). But the fact is that he, too, proceeded with long-run analysis (see above, section II), a striking example involving the extraction of corn from treatment in terms

CONCLUSION 999

of allocation theory on the grounds that supply and demand are in that case interdependent, considering the (immediate) effect of increased food on population growth, a reinforcement of physiocratic analysis - it is a procedure Adam Smith also followed on occasion - with profoundly important policy implications. It was, therefore, both self-righteous and unjustified to continue his remark: 'I certainly am disposed to refer frequently to things as they are, as the only way of making one's writing practically useful to society, and I think also the only way of being secure from falling into the errors of the taylors of Laputa, and by a slight mistake at the outset arrive at conclusions the most distant from the truth' (121-2). I have no intention to denigrate in general Mai thus's concern with responsible application, surprising as appear to be the applications of the cornpricing and wage-fund analyses (above, p. 969). There are impressive cases of caution, as in application of the 'Sraffian' corn-profit analysis (see chapter 10, pp. 436, 457-8). It is the contrast with Ricardo, insisted upon by Mai thus to his own credit, that is too sharply drawn. In Mai thus's concern to convey the possibility of non-sustainable growth, we have the major analytical difference with Ricardo. And this was certainly on his mind in the letter of 26 January 1817. There is, first, an insistence 'that the progress of society consists of irregular movements, and that to omit the consideration of causes which for eight or ten years will give a great stimulus to production and population, or a great check to them, is to omit the causes of the wealth and poverty of nations - the grand object of all enquiries in Political Economy ... We see in all the countries around us, and in our own particularly, periods of greater and less prosperity and sometimes of adversity, but never the uniform progress which you seem alone to contemplate' (122). There is something to this - though we know that J.S. Mill succeeded brilliandy in allowing for cyclical fluctuations in real income. Unfortunately, Malthus then proceeded to elaborate on 'the still more specific and fundamental cause of our difference,' Ricardo's presumption that 'the wants and tastes of mankind are always ready for the supply,' whereas in fact 'few things are more difficult, than to inspire new tastes and wants .... [PJractically the actual check to produce and population arises more from want of stimulus than want of power to produce' (122-3). The fact, however, is that Ricardo allowed much of this in 'underdeveloped' economies, though not in contemporary Britain; and it is by no means clear that Mai thus's model proved superior in application to longrun trends. Whereas Ricardo sought to minimize his purely methodological differences with Malthus, representing them as no more than different weightings of concern, on one occasion he defined what seems an irreconcilable contrast regarding the scope of the science. It was the contrast that so much struck Keynes (see Introduction, p. 8). Malthus had taken for granted the long-standing concern of economists to be with 'the nature and causes of wealth' (25 September 1820; 1951-73, VIII, 261). This

1000 CONCLUSION

Ricardo denied: 'Political Economy you think is an enquiry into the nature and causes of wealth - I think it should rather be called an enquiry into the laws which determine the division of the produce of industry amongst the classes who concur in its formation. No law can be laid down respecting quantity, but a tolerably correct one can be laid down respecting proportions. Every day I am more satisfied that the former enquiry is vain and delusive, and the latter only the true objects of the science' (9 October; 278-9). Malthus responded sharply: 'With regard to your new definition of the objects of Political Economy, I own it appears to me very confined; and if it be just, I should say that political economy would be at once converted from a science which I have always considered as the most practically useful in the whole circle, into one which would merely serve to gratify curiosity' (26 October; 286). It is regrettable that Ricardo failed to specify his precise intentions. But presumably he did not mean that the analysis of 'wealth' as such was 'vain and delusive.' This was certainly not the case in the letter of 23 February i8i6.38 And, more technically, the profit-rent division plays on the savings rate and the growth rate of the economy in so far as savings propensities differ between classes, while the profit-wage breakdown is equally significant from the perspective of the causes and consequences of growth. Similarly, the analysis of machinery reflects a concern with wealth. In a letter to Malthus of 28 September 1821 this is fully confirmed: 'Mankind are only interested in making labour productive, in the enjoyment of abundance, and in a good distribution of the produce obtained by capital and industry' (1951-73, IX, 83). This more catholic perspective on scope seems an accurate statement of Ricardo's actual procedures. Reading back into his original statement of 9 October 1820, it is conceivable that he was denying the possibility of making predictions regarding wealth - 'No law can be laid down respecting quantity' - considering the unpredictable intervention of new technology, but not insisting on the literal abandonment of 'the nature and causes of wealth' as a legitimate scientific concern. But Malthus seems to have understood it in the latter sense and reacted understandably.

Waterman maintains, from the theological context, that though 'in attack' Malthus 'was an admirable, indeed exemplary, controversialist, courteous, 38 'I hope you have quite determined to extend your new edition [of the Essay on Population] to another volume, and that you are now making great progress in it. I wish much to see a regular and connected statement of your opinions on what I deem the most difficult, and perhaps the most important topic of Political Economy, namely the progress of a country in wealth and the laws by which the increasing produce is distributed' (1951-73. VII, 24).

CONCLUSION 1001

magnanimous, and fair-minded; in retreat he was less gracious, correcting logical slips by minimal, unadvertised amendments, and camouflaging retraction by a verbal smokescreen' (1991, 147; see also 138; 1987, 269). Now there is something to this since retractions of his criticisms against Ricardo in the second edition are indeed 'minimal' and 'unadvertised amendments.' Thus the accusation that the possibility of low profits despite high agricultural productivity reflected 'a distinction of the greatest practical importance, which ... has been quite overlooked by Mr. Ricardo' (1820, 190) is replaced in the second edition by a more accommodating observation: These are all points of great practical consequence which have been much overlooked. The doctrine of the gradations of soils is a most important one, but in drawing practical conclusions from it, great care should be taken to apply it correctly' (1836, 183). And as already indicated (above, P- 995), in the second edition Malthus silently withdrew his unjustified criticism that Ricardo had failed to allow for the effect on profits of variable real wages. But this is not the whole picture by any means. That the 'misrepresentations' of Ricardo's position were largely honest errors is suggested by Malthus's personal regard for Ricardo: 'I never loved any body out of my own family so much. Our interchange of opinions was so unreserved, and the object after which we were both enquiring was so entirely the truth, and nothing else, that I cannot but think we sooner or later must have agreed' (reported by Empson, 1837, 499; in Semmel, 1963, 261). There are also the generous tributes he himself publicly paid Ricardo. On so central a policy issue as the return to gold, he declared in 1820 that 'Mr. Ricardo deserves the thanks of his country for having suggested [a measure] which has rendered the transition more easy than could reasonably have been expected' (see chapter 12, p. 623; similarly in 1811, see chapter 13, p. 654). By his distinction between value and wealth, he had rendered 'an unquestionable service to the science of political economy' (chapter 6, p. 221; see also p. 292). Regarding the inverse wage-profit relation, he wrote: 'Of all the truths which Mr. Ricardo has established, one of the most useful and important is that profits are determined by the proportion of the whole produce which goes to labour'; Ricardo's contribution had in fact furnished 'the means of improving the science of Political Economy' (chapter 10, pp. 486-8). That his own doctrine relating to the role of aggregate demand stood up empirically better than the Ricardian emphasis upon the difficulty of production on the land in accounting for a (supposed) historical decline in the profit rate did not gainsay that the evidence accorded 'most perfectly with the more general proposition of Mr. Ricardo respecting profits, namely that they are determined by the proportion of the whole produce which goes to labour.' It will be recalled, too, that Malthus defended Ricardo against Jones (above, pp. 953-4) and against Bailey, representing his own differences with Ricardo on value measurement as a matter of detail rather than of principle (chapter 7, pp. 337f.).

1002 CONCLUSION

Waterman's perspective would carry us some way towards understanding the quiet manner in which Malthus announced his transformation on commercial policy in the i820s. But there is no need to have recourse to this sort of rationale. After all, he had set the stage in very explicit terms for the change in the crucial note itself, and explained the retention of the original text in the new edition (see chapter 17, p. 851).39 As for the original position in the protectionist pamphlet of 1815, it is greatly to his credit that he did not unfairly reinforce the recommendation by suggesting prospective increasing returns; he candidly spelled out the probable costs (see chapter 15, 754). Interestingly, Ricardo at that time took this view: 'a more candid or better man nowhere exists,' whose 'erroneous opinions respecting the expediency of a free trade in corn ... are honest opinions' (13 October 1819; see above, pp. 866-7) .4° He even let his high regard for Malthus's 'characteristic candour' emerge in the Principles itself (I, 398). A closing remark is in order on Malthus's policy recommendations regarding population control. Horner remarked in 1804 to Jeffrey that Malthus 'is a man in conversation of good sense, great candour, and liberality; the last is a rare qualification for an English clergyman ...' (cited in Fetter, 1957, 10). Our chapter 18 has fully confirmed the validity of this evaluation; his policy position was extraordinarily progressive and, in the circumstances, courageous. This episode reinforces confidence in the interpretation we have offered regarding the abandonment of protectionism. IX

A FINAL SUMMING-UP: MALTHUS, THE CLASSICS, AND KEYNES

Lord Robbins opined that Malthus's role in building up the system of classical thought is 'a matter likely to arouse much more controversy than the answer to a similar question in the case of the other great classical economists,' though Robbins himself had little doubt of a profound contribution as far as regards 'the central traditions of the theory of value and distribution,' including here the theory of population in a land-scarcity context (1970, 86, 89) — Samuelson's 'canonical' model. There is indeed 39 Salim Rashid takes a very different view: 'I believe your substantive conclusion. Malthus did change his mind. But the evidence you present will be unconvincing to anyone who considers Malthus to be a scholar — perhaps you do too! However, I have long believed Malthus to have possessed a devious and even dishonest streak. He did change his mind but lacked the honesty to say so outright. Anyway, that is my jaundiced view' (letter to the author, cited with permission, dated 8 March 1991). 40 There was also a positive side to Torrens's complaint of inconsistency documented in our Introduction: 'If these fluctuating and contradictory opinions, however, do not indicate that, in the science of political economy, Mr. Malthus has attained any very clear conclusions, or arrived at any certain conceptions, they at least must serve to convince us that he possesses in a very eminent degree, a spirit of candour and a love of truth' (1815, xi).

CONCLUSION 1003

much common ground in this domain once we silence the noise emanating from the misunderstandings between himself and Ricardo and the exaggerated representation of his own procedures as methodologically distinct. At the same time, I would not ignore the differences of detail in their respective cost theories of value; and there are the 'physiocratic' agricultural-surplus and the corn-profit constructs, which complicate the picture. As for monetary theory - the matter of the Bullionist debates - that the main difference between Ricardo and Mai thus was a matter of 'focus,' not analysis (Robbins, 90), seems a fair evaluation. In fact, we have seen that Mai thus exerted some considerable influence on Ricardo in this domain (chapter 14, 710). The problem of placing Malthus in the classical fold is, admittedly, troublesome regarding aggregate equilibrium. To my mind this problem does not pertain to Malthus's allowances for excess capacity as such, notwithstanding the impressive quality of his analysis of the postwar depression; Ricardo's concern to avoid deflation in returning to gold, and, in particular, J.S. Mill's position on the influence of consumption on production in the 18305 make that clear.41 It is in the secular realm that any notion of a common 'classical system' seems to break down. Yet even here there are several considerations that narrow, though by no means bridge, the gap. First, the extensions made to Smith's 'competition of capitals' relate most specifically to the industrial sector; the Law of Markets was still applied to corn, and the agricultural sector was treated in landscarcity terms. Second, while the problem for Malthus related to the danger of excessive accumulation - excessive because financed from reduced consumption rather than from increased profits - in so far as accumulation is motivated by the profit rate, as Malthus (taking the long view) believed was the case in advanced economies, there normally would not occur non-sustainable accumulation. As we know (above, p. 983) he, in fact, refused to countenance governmental interference with the savings rate; the profit motive in that particular regard was sacrosanct; similarly, he relied on 'the interest of individual capitalists' with respect to the rate of adoption of 'machinery' (chapter 11, 575). Though he opposed debt repayment and the encouragement of increased saving during depression, his thoroughgoing 'conservatism' - his Friedmanesque stance - regarding the gold standard, fear of inflation, and perspective on counter-cyclical monetary policy have all been documented (chapter 13). The practical implications of his position are, in brief, surprisingly orthodox. And the lack of novel policy recommendations - along with the extreme complexity of the analytical problem Malthus set for himself - may well account for

41 There is, though, this important difference, that Mill allowed for self-corrective mechanisms to explain the temporary nature of depression, whereas Malthus had in mind permanent disequilibrium depending for correction on exogenous stimuli.

1004 CONCLUSION

that long-term victory of the Ricardian paradigm so greatly regretted by Keynes. From this perspective - and also regarding his position on the rate of return as the social index of the appropriate savings rate (above, P- 983) - there is considerable merit to Negishi's observation that so 'classical' does Mai thus appear at times in the Principles that he 'is not so much an underconsumptionist as a supply sider' (1989, 138-9, also 143-7; and 1993, 116). The Malthus-Keynes nexus is complex. Malthus might seem at least to have 'set the agenda' for what is popularly seen as the Keynesian Revolution with its focus on aggregate demand as a strategic variable. But, as we have argued (chapter 11, p. 585; 12, pp. 628-9), the details of the analysis of macro-stabilization do not point in this direction. What of Keynes's own perspective on the linkage? His extraordinary tribute of 1933 (see Introduction, pp. 7-9) turned on the section in the Principles concerning 'distribution occasioned by unproductive consumers,' which he found to contain 'a masterly expositon of the conditions which determine the optimum of saving in the actual economic system in which we live' (1933, 145). He cited two specific passages (1820, 495, 512) as 'the best economic analysis ever written of the events of 1815-20' (146). And the 'whole problem of the balance between Saving and Investment had been posed in the Preface [sic] ... ' (146-7, citing 1820, 8-9). He also refers to Malthus's 'complete comprehension of the effects of excessive saving on output via its effects on profits' (i4i). 42 Since all this appeared in 1933, it is unlikely that Keynes intended to suggest Malthus's ideas as precursor of those in the General Theory.43 Rutherford (1987) raises this point and suggests that Keynes had in mind The Treatise on Money; and he finds indeed a 'close correspondence.' Patinkin maintains to the contrary that Keynes 'had already achieved a full understanding' of the theory of effective demand by 1933 (1982, 23). But the fact is that, in his essay Keynes did not focus on effective demand as such, even complaining that Malthus had described it 'none too clearly' (above, p. 8). And in the General Theory, where the focus is more specifically on the aggregate-demand function, he repeats the complaint, observing that Malthus had failed to provide an adequate 'alternative construction' to Ricardo's: 'The idea that we can safely neglect

42 Yet, strangely, despite all this, he also conceded that Malthus's comprehension was 'intuitive' and that he had expressed himself 'none too clearly' (122). There was one more specific criticism - Malthus's 'over-looking entirely the part played by the rate of interest. Twenty years ago I should have retorted to Malthus that the state of affairs he envisages could not occur unless the rate of interest has first fallen to zero. Malthus perceived, as often, what was true; but it is essential to a complete comprehension of why it is true, to explain how an excess of frugality does not bring with it a decline to zero in the rate of interest' (147-8). 43 Moreover, the Malthus letters of July 1821, cited at length by Keynes (above chapter 11, pp. 519-21), identify ex ante savings and investment.

CONCLUSION 1005

the aggregate demand function is fundamental to Ricardian economics, which underlie what we have been taught for more than a century. Malthus, indeed, has vehemently opposed Ricardo's doctrine that it was impossible for effective demand to be deficient; but vainly. For, since Malthus was unable to explain clearly (apart from an appeal to the facts of common observation) how and why effective demand could be deficient or excessive, he failed to furnish an alternative construction; and Ricardo conquered England as completely as the Holy Inquisition conquered Spain' (1936, 32). It is my impression that, at the most, Keynes derived only a general sort of 'inspiration' from Malthus on effective demand, but nothing substantive. As explained, a strong Malthus-Keynes link with respect to 'short-run' demand deficiency does not seem convincing. There is, however, an interpretation of the General Theory which finds its predominant concern to be with output fluctuations about a level below the achievable or optimum rate given by the production frontier, that level constituting a permanent shortfall of output attributable proximately to a capital stock below its achievable level, and suggesting appropriate institutional changes to assure investment decisions 'based on long views' (Meltzer, 1988, 133, 317-19). Were this indeed Keynes's primary concern - some might see this as closer to a post-Keynesian perspective (see O'Brien, 1975, 230) - then Malthus would have provided at least a prologue to it by his insistence that the secular performance of the economy is not governed solely by the locus of its production frontier, and also by his effort to define the conditions for sustainable growth. But whatever the parallels with Keynesian economics might be, it is here that one encounters Malthus's most striking contribution, and - as mentioned - Malthus stands apart from the New School, though on policy there remains a surprising degree of common ground. In addition to his concern with 'sustainable growth,' which sets Malthus apart, there is his support for the 1815 Corn Bill. Possibly the finest tribute to Ricardo - albeit a 'silent' one - is the fact that, in the end, Malthus abandoned agricultural protectionism and much of its theoretical physiocratic underpinning, accepting the Ricardian vision of Britain's future as a mixed economy fuelled by the industrial sector. With this step a common 'classical' position was profoundly enhanced.

APPENDIX: MALTHUS AND KEYNES: SOME RECENT SECONDARY LITERATURE Kates (1994) has recently attempted to demonstrate that 'Keynes developed a theory of fluctuations in aggregate demand to explain fluctuations in output and employment due to the influence on him of the writings of Thomas Robert Malthus which Keynes was reading in October and November, 1932 [in the

1006 CONCLUSION

course of] updating his essay on Malthus for inclusion in Essays in Biography' that 'had Keynes not read Malthus, he almost certainly would never have written a book attacking Say's Law or attributing recessions and depressions to failure of effective demand' (10-11). Or again: 'Keynes discovered the idea of effective demand by reading Malthus' (12). Such a claim, Kates points out (iof.), has never been made in the literature, with two qualifications relating to the work of O'Leary (1942) and Klein (1966); others perceived Keynes as arriving at his position independently and finding ex post support in Malthus. As for the two exceptions, Kates notes that, while O'Leary saw an influence, he himself conceded that 'it is impossible to say to what extent' (12). And Klein was 'ambiguous about the extent to which Malthus influenced Keynes,' and 'cannot... be interpreted as saying that Keynes discovered the idea of effective demand by reading Malthus.' While I do not wish to undermine Kates's claim to originality, it seems to me that Klein was not quite as ambiguous as Kates maintains: In many cases it is impossible to say whether or not any earlier writers could have had any direct influence on the development of Keynes' ideas. It may be that he always developed his ideas independently, and then pointed out others who have previously expressed similar ideas. But in one instance, we can be reasonably sure that Keynes derived a profound inspiration. T.R. Malthus, a respectable and highly competent economist, was openly admired by Keynes, and, at a time when the revolution was about to be executed. In his Essays in Biography, finished by February, 1933, Keynes paid great tribute to Malthus and particularly noted the latter's discussion of effective demand. As was mentioned in a previous chapter, the break between Keynes and his contemporaries can be likened in many ways to the dispute which occurred after the Napoleonic Wars between Malthus and Ricardo. The issues in each case were essentially the same. Malthus and, later, Keynes wanted to replace Say's Law with a theory of effective demand. There can be little doubt that Keynes was aware of this historical similarity and must have profited much from a perusal of the early literature. (Klein, 1966, 125)

Kates is then closer to Klein than Kates allows. Klein is not merely claiming Malthus as an 'anticipator,' but as having been 'a profound inspiration,' specifically with regard to the discussion of effective demand. Kates mentions this but grudgingly. There is also Klein's statement (not mentioned) that, 'while we shall never probably know how much stimulation Keynes received from many of his anticipators, we can be quite sure that he drew much from Malthus, whom he openly admired' (44). I would not put so much weight on Klein were it not for the fact that Kates himself is 'ambiguous about the extent to which Malthus influenced Keynes.' He has a section titled The Overlap between Malthus and Keynes' to establish 'how close Malthus and Keynes were ...just how similar their arguments are,' and draws the implication that this cannot be a matter of chance: 'There is an extraordinary degree of overlap if both Keynes and Malthus actually reached the same conclusions independently' (12-13). But the specifics of Malthus's case are never properly dealt with; and also lacking is a detailed account of exactly what Keynes thought he was getting from Malthus (the materials on 17-18 are insuffi-

CONCLUSION 1007 ciently precise). This deficiency is underscored by the position adopted near the close: 'That Malthus had a different theory of "effective demand" than Keynes would ultimately develop is not really germane' (18). If Kates cannot show that Malthus inspired the specific arguments used by Keynes in the General Theory, then his initial claims are much diluted; even accepting that Keynes introduced effective demand only after reading the Malthus-Ricardo correspondence and Malthus's Principles (1820) - this demonstration constitutes the bulk of Kates's paper - if what he got from Malthus was a perspective that differed from his own, then the debt is not clear-cut. The ambiguity charged against Klein is thus just as applicable against Kates; in fact, Kates invites the charge. Similarly, the point made against O'Leary can equally be made against Kates. With this in mind I turn to the treatment accorded Rutherford (1987). As mentioned, Kates fails to be sufficiently specific regarding Malthus's argument; Rutherford provided a detailed account, and he envisaged a link between the Treatise on Money and Malthus. Kates mentions this in note 8 but fails to realize its significance. For Rutherford drew a different conclusion from the timing of Keynes's Essay relative to his reading of Malthus: 'Too little attention has been paid to the timing of the claims Keynes made for Malthus. The critical references to the principle of effective demand were added to the Essay on Malthus in 1933, suggesting that it is with the economics of the Treatise that we should make our comparison' (1987, 188). Now Kates himself mentions in the text to which the Rutherford's note is attached: 'The fact that Keynes had previously had his own saving-investment apparatus and believed in public sector stimulus would have made the Malthusian addition of effective demand attractive to him' (18-19). Surely this implies a much more subtle debt than that stated at the outset.

This page intentionally left blank

REFERENCES

I

WORKS BY THOMAS ROBERT MALTHUS

Books and pamphlets Works = The Works of Thomas Robert Malthus. Ed. E.A. Wrigley and D. Souden (8 vols.). London 1986 1798. An Essay on the Principle of Population, ist ed., London; Facsimile ed., London 1926. Also in Works, I 1800. An Investigation of the Cause of the present High Price of Provisions, ist ed., London. In Works, 7, 5-18 1803. An Essay on the Principle of Population, sd ed. London. In Works, 2-3 1806. An Essay on the Principle of Population. 3d ed. (2 vols.). London i8c>7a. An Essay on the Principle of Population. 4th ed. (2 vols.). London iSoyb. A Letter to Samuel Whitbread on his Proposed bill, for the Amendment of the Poor Laws. 1st ed., London. In Works, 4, 5-19 1814. Observations on the Effects of the Corn Laws, ist ed., London. In Works, 7, 87-109 i8i5a. The Grounds of an Opinion on the Policy of Restricting the Importation of Foreign Corn, ist ed., London. In Works, 7, 151-74 i8i5b. An Inquiry into the Nature and Progress of Rent. 1st ed., London. In Works, 7, 115-45 1817. An Essay on the Principle of Population. 5th ed. (3 vols.). London 1820. Principles of Political Economy. 1st ed., London. Ed. J. Pullen (2 vols.). Cambridge 1989 i823b. The Measure of Value Stated and Illustrated, ist ed., London. In Works, 7, 179-221 1826. An Essay on the Principle of Population. 6th ed. (2 vols.). London. In Works, 2-3

1010 REFERENCES

i827a. Definitions in Political Economy. 1st ed., London. In Works, 8 1836. Principles of Political Economy (posthumously published). 2d ed., London. [In Works, 5-6] 1966. The Travel Diaries of T.R. Malthus. Ed. P. James. Cambridge 1989. An Essay on the Principle of Population. Ed. P.James (2 vols.). Cambridge Journal articles, and others 1809. 'Review of Thomas Newenham.' Edinburgh Review 14/27 (April), 151-70. In Works, 4, 47-67 181 la. 'Depreciation of Paper Currency.' Edinburgh Review 17/34 (February), 339-72. In Works, 7, 21-56 181 ib. 'Pamphlets on the Bullion Question.' Edinburgh Review. 18/36 (August), 448-70. In Works, 7, 57-82 i823a. 'High and Low Prices.' Quarterly Review 29/57 (April), 214-39. In Works, 7, 225-53 i824a. 'Political Economy.' Quarterly Review 30/60, 297-334. In Works, 7, 257-97 i824b. 'Population.' Supplement to the 4th, 5th and 6th editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, VI, Edinburgh, April, 307-33. In Works, 4, 179-243 1825. 'On the Measure of the Conditions Necessary to the Supply of Commodities.' Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, I, part 1, 1825-1829, 171-80. In Works, 7, 301-11 i827b. 'On the meaning which is most usually and most correctly attached to the term Value of a Commodity.' Transactions of the Royal Society of Literature, I, part 2, 1825-29, 74-81. In Works, 7, 313-23 1966. The Travel Diaries of Thomas Robert Malthus. Ed. P. James. Cambridge II OTHER PRIMARY WORKS

Aikin, John. 1795. A Description of the Country from thirty to forty Miles round Manchester. London Anderson, James. 1777. Observations on the Means of Exciting a Spirit of National Industry. Edinburgh - 1801. A Calm Investigation of the Circumstances that have led to the Present Scarcity of Grain in Britain. London [Anon]. 1798. Review of Malthus, 1798. Analytical Review 287'2 (August), 119-25 [Anon]. 1821. Observations on Certain Verbal Disputes in Political Economy. London Bailey, Samuel. 1825. -A Critical Dissertation on the Nature, Measure and Causes of Value. London Barton, John. 1817. Observations on the Circumstances Which Influence the Condition of the Labouring Classes of Society. London

REFERENCES

1011

Bentham, Jeremy. 1789. An Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation. 1st ed., London. Ed. J.H. Burns and H.L.A. Hart. London 1970 - 1801-4. ['Method and Leading Features of an Institute of Political Economy.'] In Jeremy Bentham's Economic Writings, ed. W. Stark, III, 305-80. London 1954 Blake, William. 1810. Observations on the Principles which Regulate the Course of Exchange. London - 1823. Observations on the Effects Produced by the Expenditure of Government during the Restriction of Cash Payments. London Bosanquet, Charles. 1810. Practical Observations on the Report of the Bullion Committee. London Bridge, Bewick. 1810. Lectures on the Elements of Algebra. London Buchanan, David. 1814. Observations on the Subjects Treated of in Dr. Smith's Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. 1st ed., Edinburgh and London Carlyle, Thomas. 1849. 'Occasional Discourse on the Negro Question.' Eraser's Magazine, 40 (December), 670-9 Cazenove, J. 1822. Considerations on the Accumulation of Capital and its Effects on Exchangeable Value. London Chalmers, George. 1782. An Estimate of the Comparative Strength of Great Britain during the present and four preceding reigns, ist ed., London Chalmers, Thomas. 1832. On Political Economy. Glasgow Commons, John. (1934) Institutional Economics: Its Place in Political Economy. New York de Sismondi, J.C.L. Simonde. 1803. De la richesse commercial, ou principes d'economie politique appliques a la legislation du commerce. (2 vols.). Geneva - 1818. Nouveaux principes d'economie politique. ist ed., Geneva; 2d ed., Paris 1827. Ed. G. Sotiroff, Geneva 1951 Dupont de Nemours, P.S. 1768. Physiocratie. Leiden - 1817. Examen du livre de M. Malthus sur le Principe de Population. Philadelphia [Empson, William]. 1837. 'Life, Writings and Character of Mr. Malthus.' Edinburgh Review 64/130, Article IX (January) 469-506. In Occasional Papers ofT.R. Malthus, ed. B. Semmel, 231-68. New York 1963 Ganilh, Charles. 1812. An Inquiry into the Various Systems of Political Economy. Trans. D. Boileau, London Godwin, William. 1796. Enquiry Concerning Political Justice. 2d. ed. (2 vols.). London - 1801. Thoughts occasioned by the perusal of Dr. Parr's Spital sermon ... being a reply to the attacks of... the author of an Essay on Population and others. London [Hazlitt, William]. 1807. A Reply to the 'Essay on Population' by the Rev. T.R. Malthus. London

1012 REFERENCES

Heberden, William. 1801. Observations on the Increase and Decrease of Different Diseases and particularly the Plague, London Horner, Francis. 1853. Memoirs and Correspondence. Ed. Leonard Horner (2 vols.). London ~ !994- The Horner Papers: Selections from the Letters and Miscellaneous Writings of Francis Horner, M.P., 1795-1817. Ed. Kenneth Bourne and W.B. Taylor. Edinburgh Horton, RJ. Wilmot. 1830. The Causes and Remedies of Pauperism in the United Kingdom considered. London Hume, David. 1752. Political Discourse. 1st ed., Edinburgh. In E. Rotwein, ed., David Hume: Writings on Economics. London 1955 Huskisson, William. 1810. The Question concerning the Depreciation of our Currency stated and examined. London and Edinburgh — 1830. Essays on Political Economy. London Jacob, William. 1826. Report on the trade in Foreign Corn, and on the Agriculture of the North of Europe. (Ordered to be printed by the House of Commons.) London Jarrold, Thomas. 1806. Dissertations on Man, Philosophical, Physiological and Political, in Answer to Mr. Malthus 's Essay. London Jevons, W.S. 1879. Theory of Political Economy. 2d ed., London - 1972-81. Papers and Correspondence. Ed. R.D.C. Black (7 vols.). London Jones, Richard. 1831. An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth. London Keynes, J.M. 1936. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. 1st ed., London King, Lord. 1803. Thoughts on the Restrictions of Payments in Specie at the Banks of England and Ireland. London. (2d ed. 1804, entitled Thoughts on the Effects of the Bank Restriction) Lauderdale, James Maitland, Earl of. 1814. A Letter on the Corn Laws. London and Edinburgh - 1819. An Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of Public Wealth. 2d ed., Edinburgh Law, John. 1750. Money and Trade considered, with a Proposal for supplying the Nation with Money [1705]. Glasgow Locke, John. 1691. Some Considerations of the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and Raising the Value of Money. London Longfield, Mountifort. 1834. Lectures on Political Economy. 1st ed., Dublin. In The Economic Writings of Montifort Longfield. New York, 1971 Lowe, Joseph. 1822. The Present State of England, in regard to Agriculture, Trade and Finance. London Lloyd, W.F. 1833. Two Lectures on the Checks to Population. Oxford McCulloch, J.R. 1816. Essay on the Question of Reducing the Interest on the National Debt. Edinburgh — 1823. 'Political Economy.' Supplement to the 4th, 5th and 6th editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, VI, April, 216-78 - i824a. 'Corn Laws and Corn Trade.' Supplement to the 6th edition of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, III, 342-73

REFERENCES 1013

- i824b. Trice of Foreign Corn - Abolition of the Corn-Laws.' Edinburgh Review 41/81 (October), 55-78 - 1864. The Principles of Political Economy. 5th ed., Edinburgh Mandeville, Bernard. 1732. The Fable of the Bees; or Private Vices, Publick Benefits. 6th ed. Ed. F.B. Kaye, Oxford 1924 Marcet, Jane. 1833. John Hopkins's Notions on Political Economy. Boston Marshall, Alfred. 1920. Principles of Economics. 8th ed., London Marx, Karl. 1867-94. Capital I. Moscow 1965; III, Moscow 1962 - 1862-3. Theories of Surplus Value. II, Moscow 1968 Mill, James. 1804. An Essay on the Impolicy of Bounty on the Exportation of Corn. London - 1806. 'Sir James Stewart's "Collected Works."' Literary Journal I, 2d Series, March, 225-35 - 1821. Elements of Political Economy. 1st ed., London Mill, J.S. 1823. 'Malthus's Measure of Value.' Morning Chronicle, 5 September, 2. In Collected Works, XXII, 51-60. Toronto 1986 - i825a. The Corn Laws.' Westminster Review 3 (April), 394-420. In Collected Works, IV. 45-70. Toronto 1967 - i825b. 'The Quarterly Review on Political Economy.' Westminster Review 3 (January), 213-32. In Collected Works, IV, 23-43. Toronto 1967 - 1827. 'The New Corn Law.' Westminster Review 7 (January), 169—86. In Collected Works, IV, 141-59. Toronto 1967 - 1830. 'Of the Influence of Consumption on Production.' In Essays on Some Unsettled Questions in Political Economy. London 1844. In Collected Works, TV, 262-79. Toronto 1967 - 1833. 'Remarks on Bentham's Philosophy.' In England and the English, ed. E.L. Bulwer, II, 321-44. London. In Collected Works, X, 3-18. Toronto 1969 - 1835. 'Sedgwick's Discourse.' London Review 1 (July), 341-71. In Collected Works, X, 31-74. Toronto 1969 - 1848. Principles of Political Economy. 1st ed., London; 7th ed., London, 1871. In Collected Works, II-III. Toronto 1965 - 1852. 'Whewell on Moral Philosophy.' Westminster and Foreign Quarterly Review 58 (October), 349-85. In Collected Works, X, 175-201. Toronto 1969 - 1865. An Examination of Sir William Hamilton's Philosophy. 1st ed., London; 4th ed., London, 1872. In Collected Works, IX, Toronto 1979 - 1873. Autobiography. 1st ed., London. In Collected Works, I, 1-290. Toronto 1981 - 1879. 'Chapters on Socialism.' Forthnightly Review, n.s. 25 (February), 217-37; (March), 373-82; (April), 513-30 (posthumously published). In Collected Works, V, 705-53. Toronto 1967 - 1972. The Later Letters, 1849-1873. Collected Works, XIV-XVII, Toronto - Commonplace Book, Mill-Taylor Collection, London School of Economics

1014 REFERENCES

Mirabeau, V.R. 1762—4. L'Ami des hommes, ou, traite de la population. 5th ed. (9 vols.). Paris Mushet, Robert. 1810. An Enquiry into the Effects Produced on the National Currency and Rates of Exchange by the Bank Rectriction Bill. London Newenham, Thomas. 1808. A View of the Natural, Political and Commercial Circumstances of Ireland. London Oddy, Joshua Jepson. 1805. European Commerce, showing New and Secure Channels of Trade with the Continent. London [Otter, William]. 1836. 'Memoir of Robert Malthus.' In Malthus, Principles of Political Economy, 2d ed., xiii—liv. London Owen, Robert. 1816. A new view of society; or, essays on the principle and the formation of the human character. 2d ed., London and Edinburgh Paine, Thomas. 1791. Rights of man: being an answer to Mr. Burke's attack on the French Revolution. London and Dublin Paley, William. 1785. The Principles of Moral and Political Philosophy. 1st ed., London - 1802. Natural Theology, or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity. 1st ed., London; 2d ed., London 1803 - 1850. 'Sermons on Several Subjects,' No. XXXIII, The Works of William Paley D.D. (posthumously published). 599-601. Philadelphia Place, F. 1822. Illustrations and Proofs of the Principle of Population. London 1822; London 1930; New York 1967 Political Economy Club. 1921. Centenary Volume. London Price, Richard. 1783. Observations on Reversionary Payments, on Schemes for Providing Annuities for Widows, and for Persons in Old Age. 4th ed., London Rae, John. 1834. Statement of Some New Principles on the Subject of Political Economy. 1st ed., Boston. In R. Warren James, ed., John Rae: Political Economist, Toronto 1965 Ravenstone, Piercy [Richard Puller]. 1821. A Few Doubts ...on the Subjects of Population and Political Economy. London Ricardo, David. 1951-1973. The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo. Ed. P. Sraffa (11 vols.). Cambridge Say, J.B. 1803. Traite d'economic politique. 1st ed., Paris; 2d ed., 1814; 4th ed., 1819; 5th ed., 1826 - 1821. Letters to Mr. Malthus on Several Subjects of political Economy and on the Cause of the Stagnation of Commerce. London Senior, Nassau. 1829. Two Lectures on population ...to which is added, a Correspondence Between the Author and the Rev. T.R Malthus. London — 1830. Three Lectures on the Cost of Obtaining Money, and on Some Effects of Private and Government Paper Money. London Short, Thomas. 1750. New Observations on Town and Country Bills of Mortality. London Sinclair, John. 1812. An Account of the Systems of Husbandry adopted in the more improved Districts of Scotland. 1st ed., Edinburgh and London; 3d ed., 1814

REFERENCES 1015

Smith, Adam. 1776. An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. London. Modern Library ed., ed. E. Cannan, New York 1937 — 1802. Recherches sur la nature et les causes de la richesse des nations. Trans. Germain Garnier (5 vols.). Paris - 1814. Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. 3 vols. 1st ed., ed. David Buchanan. Edinburgh and London [Southey, Robert.] 1803. 'Malthus's Essay on Population,' Annual Review and History of Literature; for 1803, 2, 292-301 [1804] - 1831. 'Moral and Political State of the British Empire,' Quarterly Review 44/87 (January), 261-317 Spence, William. 1807. Britain Independent of Commerce. 1st ed., London; 2d ed., 1808. In Tracts on Political Economy. London 1822; New York 1933 Steuart, Sir James. 1767. An Inquiry into the Principles of Political Oeconomy. 1st ed., Dublin (3 vols.). Ed. A.S. Skinner, Chicago 1966 Sumner, John Bird. 1816. A Treatise on the Records of the Creation and on the Moral Attributes of the Creator. (2 vols.). London Sussmilch, Johann Peter. 1741. Die goettlliche Ordnung in den veraenderungen des menschlichen Geschlechts. 1st ed., Berlin; (3 vols.) Berlin 1798 Thompson, T. Perronet. 1826. The True Theory of Rent in Opposition to Mr. Ricardo and Others. London Thornton, Henry. 1802. An Enquiry into the Nature and Effects of the Paper Credit of Great Britain. 1st ed., London. Ed. F.A. von Hayek, London 1939, 1962 Todhunter, I. 1876. William Whewell, D.D.: An Account of His Writings, with Selections from his Literary and Scientific Correspondence. (2 vols.). London Tooke, Thomas. 1823. Thoughts and Details on the High and Low Prices of the Thirty Years, I7g$-i822. 1st ed., London; 2d ed., London 1824 Torrens, Robert. 1815. An Essay on the External Corn Trade, ist ed., London; 3d ed., London 1826 - 1818. 'Strictures on Mr. Ricardo's Doctrine respecting Value,' Edinburgh Magazine, October, 335-8 - 1819. 'Mr. Owen's Plans for Relieving the National Distress.' Edinburgh Review 32/64 (October), 453-77 - 1821. An Essay on the Production of Wealth, ist ed., London. New York 1965 Tucker, Abraham. 1763-78. Light of Nature Pursued. (5 vols.). London Turgot, A.R.J. 1770. Reflexion sur la Formation et Distribution des Richesses. Paris von Boehm-Bawerk, E. 1890. Capital and Interest. Trans. William Smart, London 1930 von Humboldt, Friedrich Heinrich Alexander. 1811. Essai politique sur k royaume de la NouvelleEspagne (5 vols.). Paris Wallace, Robert. 1753. Dissertation on the Numbers of Mankind in Ancient and Modern Times. Edinburgh

1016 REFERENCES

West, Sir Edward. 1815. Essay on the Application of Capital to Land. 1st ed., London. Ed. J. Hollander, Baltimore 1903 - 1826. Price of Corn and Wages of Labour. London Weyland, John. 1816. The Principles of Population and Production. London Whewell, William. 1829. Mathematical Exposition of Some Doctrines of Political Economy. London Young, Arthur. 1801. An Inquiry into the Propriety of applying Wastes to the Better Maintenance and Support of the Poor. London - 1804. 'On the Application of the Principles of Population to the Question of assigning Land to Cottagers.' Annals of Agriculture, 41/239, 208-31 - 1812. 'An Enquiry into the Progressive Value of Money. Annals of Agriculture 46/270, [65]-135 III

PARLIAMENTARY DOCUMENTS

Customs Tariffs of the United Kingdom from 1800 to 1897 [c. 8706]. London House of Commons, Parliamentary Debates. Various years House of Commons, Parliamentary Papers. 1801. Abstract of Ansiuers and Returns under Act for taking Account of Population of Great Britain. (140) IV. [1801 census] - 1812. Abstract of Answers and Returns under Act for taking Account of Great Britain. (316, 3n) XI. [1811 census] — 1824. Sixth Report from the Select Committee on Artisans and Machinery (51) V. Malthus's evidence, 10 May, 598-601 — 1827. Third Report from the Select Committee on Emigration. (550) V. Malthus's evidence, 5 May, 311-27 — 1833. First Report of the Factories Inquiry Commission. (450) XX IV

MANUSCRIPT COLLECTIONS

Thomas Chalmers Collection. New College, Edinburgh Mill-Taylor Collection. London School of Economics, London John Murray Archives, 50 Albermarle Street, London MacVey Napier Papers. British Library, London William Whewell Papers. Trinity College, Cambridge Wilmot-Horton Correspondence, Derbyshire Record Office, Matlock Arthur Young Papers. British Library, London V SECONDARY WORKS RELATING TO MALTHUS

Bonar, J. 1924. Malthus and His Work. 2d ed. London - 1926. 'Notes on Malthus's First Essay.' In Malthus, 1798 Facscimile ed., i-xxvii. London

REFERENCES 1017 Costabile, L. 1983, 'Natural Prices, Market Prices and Effective Demand in Malthus.' Australian Economic Papers 22, 144-70 Costabile, L., and B. Rowthorn. 1985. 'Malthus's Theory of Wages and Growth.' Economic Journal 91, 418—37 de Marchi, N.B., and R.P. Sturges. 1973. 'Malthus and Ricardo's Inductivist Critics: Four Letters to William Whcwcll.' Economica 40 (November), 379-93 Dooley, Peter C. 1988. 'Malthus on Long Swings: The General Case.' Canadian Journal ofEconomics 21 (February), 200-5 Dorfman, R. 1989. 'Thomas Robert Malthus and David Ricardo.' Journal of Economic Perspectives $ (Summer), 153-64 Dupaquier, J. 1983. 'Preface.' In Malthus Past and Present, ed. J. Dupaquier, A. Fauve-Chamoux, and E. Grebenik, vii-xiii. London and New York Fetter, F.A. 1898. 'The Essay of Malthus: A Centennial Review.' Yale Review 7 (August), 153-67 Flew, A. 1970. 'Introduction.' In Malthus, Essay on the Principle of Population, 7-56. Harmondsworth Flinn, M.W. 1983. 'Malthus and his Time.' In Malthus Past and Present, ed. J. Dupaquier, A. Fauve-Chamoux, and E. Grebenik, 85-96. London and New York Ghosh, R.M. 1963. 'Malthus on Emigration and Colonization: Letters to Wilmot-Horton.' Economica 30 (February), 45—62 Gilbert, G. 1980. 'Economic Growth and the Poor in Malthus' Essay on Population.' History of Political Economy 12/1, (Spring), 83-96 Gordon, B. 1985. 'John Cazenove (1788-1879): Critic of Ricardo, Friend and Editor of Malthus.' Working Paper, Third HETSA Conference held at La Trobe University, Melbourne, May Grampp, W.D. 1956. 'Malthus on Money Wages and Welfare.' American Economic Review 46/5 (December), 924—36 — 1974- 'Malthus and His Contemporaries.' History of Political Economy 6/3 (Fall), 278-304 Hartwick, John M. 1988. 'Robert Wallace and Malthus and the Ratios,' History of Political Economy 20/3 (Fall), 357-80 Harvey-Phillips, M.B. 1984. 'Malthus's Theodicy: The Intellectual Background to his Contribution to Political Economy.' History of Political Economy 16/4 (Winter), 591-608 Hollander, Jacob H. 1903. 'Introduction.' In Malthus, An Inquiry into the Nature and Progress of Rent, Baltimore - 1932. 'Introduction.' In Malthus, Observations on the Effects of the Corn

Laws, ist ed., London 1814; 2d ed., London 1814; 3rd ed., London 1815. Baltimore Hollander, Samuel. 1969. 'Malthus and the Post-Napoleonic Depression.' History of Political Economy 1/2 (Fall), 306-35

1018 REFERENCES

- 1986. 'On Malthus's Population Principle and Social Reform.' History of Political Economy 18/2 (Summer), 187-235 - iQ92a. 'Malthus's Abandonment of Agricultural Protectionism: A Discovery in the History of Economic Thought. American Economic Review 82/3 (June), 650-9 - I992b. 'On Malthus's Physiocratic References.' History of Political Economy 24/2 (Spring), 369-80 - I995a. 'More on Malthus and Agricultural Protection.' History of Political Economy 27/3 (Fall), 531-8 James, Patricia. 1979. Population Malthus: His Life and Times. London Kates, S. 1994. 'The Malthusian Origins of the General Theory.' History of Economics Review 21 (Winter), 10-20 Keynes, J.M. 1933. 'Robert Malthus: The First of the Cambridge Economists.' In Essays in Biography, 95—149, London Lee, Maw Lin, and David Loschky. 1987. 'Malthusian Population Oscillations.' Economic Journal 97 (September), 727-39 Levy, D. 1978. 'Some Normative Aspects of the Malthusian Controversy.' History of Political Economy 10/2 (Summer), 271-85 - 1996. 'Malthusian vs. Christianity: The Moral Challenge to God's Existence.' Ms. Meek, R.L. 1953. Marx and Engels on Malthus. London Nakaya, Toshihiro. 1985. 'Theoretical Structure and Character of Malthus' Measure of Value.' Society of Economics, Nanzan University, Working Paper Series no. 2 Negishi, T. 1989. History of Economic Theory. Amsterdam - !993- 'A Smithian-Growth Model and Malthus's Optimal Propensity to Save.' European Journal of the History of Economic Thought 1/1 (Autumn), 115-27 O Grada, C. 1984. 'Malthus and the Pre-Famine Economy.' In Economists and the Irish Economy, ed. A.E. Murphy, 75-95. Dublin O'Leary, James J. 1942. 'Malthus and Keynes.' Journal of Political Economy 50 (December), 901-19 Paglin, Morton I. 1961. Malthus and Lauderdale: The Anti-Ricardian Tradition. New York Penrose, E.F. 1957. 'Malthus and the Underdeveloped Areas.' Economic Journal67 (March), 219-39 Petersen, W. 1979. Malthus. Cambridge, MA Polkinghorn, B.A. 1986. 'An Unpublished Letter from Malthus to Jane Marcet, January 22, 1833.' American Economic Review 76/4 (September) 845-7 Porta, Pier Luigi. 1992. 'Introduction.' In David Ricardo: Notes on Malthus's 'Measure of Value,' ed. Pier Luigi Porta, ix-xxi. Cambridge Prendergast, Renee. 1986. 'Malthus's Discussion of the Corn-Ratio Theory of Profits.' Cambridge Journal of Economics 10/2 (June), 187-9 - 1987. 'James Anderson's Political Economy - His Influence on Smith

REFERENCES 1019

and Mai thus.' Scottish Journal ofPolitical Economy 34 (November), 388-409 Pullen,John M. 1978. The Editor of the Second Edition of T.R. Malthus' Principles of Political Economy.' History of Political Economy, 10/2 (Summer), 286-97 - igSia. 'Malthus's Theological Ideas and Their Influence on His Principle of Population.' History of Political Economy 13/1 (Spring), 39-54 - igSib. 'Notes from Malthus: The Inverarity Manuscript.' History of Political Economy 13/4 (Winter), 794-811 - 1982. 'Malthus on the Doctrine of Proportions and the Concept of the Optimum.' Australian Economic Papers 21, 270-85 - ig87a. 'Malthus, Thomas Robert.' In The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, ed. J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, and P. Newman, III, 280-5. London - ig87b. 'Some New Information on the Rev. T.R. Malthus,' History of Political Economy 19/1 (Spring), 127-40 - 1989. 'Introduction.' In T.R. Malthus, Principles of Political Economy, xv-xix. Cambridge - 1995. 'Malthus on Agricultural Protection: An Alternative View.' History of Political Economy 27/3 (Fall), 517-30 Pullen, John M., andJ.C. Baldry. 1988. 'Malthus' Production Function,' The History of Economic Thought Society of Australia Bulletin 10 (Summer), 10-23 Rashid, S. 1981. 'Malthus' Principles and British Economic Thought, 1820-1835.' History of Political Economy 13/1 (Spring), 55-79 — 1984. 'Malthus' Theology: An Overlooked Letter and Some Comments.' History of Political Economy 16/1 (Spring), 135-8 - 1987. 'Malthus and Classical Economics.' In The New Palgrave: A Dictionary of Economics, ed. J. Eatwell, M. Milgate, and P. Newman, III, 285-90. London - 1988. 'Recent Literature on Malthus.' In W.O. Thweatt, ed., Classical Political Economy, 53—84. Boston Reisman, David. 1990. 'The Cambridge Malthus.' History of Economic Thought Newsletter 45 (Autumn), 1-4 Rutherford, R.P. 1987. 'Malthus and Keynes.' Oxford Economic Papers 39/1 (March), 175-89 Semmel, B. 1963. 'Introductory Essay: Malthus and the Reviews.' In Occasional Papers of T.R. Malthus, ed. B. Semmel, 3-29. New York - 1965. 'Malthus: Physiocracy and the Commercial System.' Economic History Review 17/3, 522-35 Sowell, T. 1962. 'Malthus and the Utilitarians.' Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science 28/2 (May), 268-74 Spengler, J.J. 1942. French Predecessors of Malthus. Durham, NC - 1960 [1945]. 'Malthus's Total Population Theory: A Restatement and Reappraisal.' In Essays in Economic Thought: Aristotle to Marshall, ed. J.J. Spengler and W.R. Allen, 349-406. Chicago 1960

1020 REFERENCES

Tribe, Keith. 1993. 'Comment to Hollander (i992[a]).' History of Economic Thought Newsletter 50 (Spring), 23 Vamplew, W. 1986. 'Malthus and the Corn Laws.' In Malthus and His Time, ed. M. Turner, 129—39. London Waterman, A.M.C. 1983. 'Malthus as a Theologian: The First Essay and the Relation between Political Economy and Christian Theology.' In Malthus Past and Present, ed. J. Dupaquier, A. Fauve-Chamoux, and E. Grebenik, 198-209. London and New York - 1987. 'On the Malthusian Theory of Long Swings.' Canadian Journal of Economics 20 (May), 257-70 — 1991. Revolution, Economics, and Religion: Christian Political Economy, 1798-1833. Cambridge - 1992. 'Analysis and ideology in Malthus's Essay on Population.' Australian Economic Papers 31 (June), 203-17 - 1995- 'Peasants, Population and Progress in Malthus and Chalmers.' In The Peasant in Economic Thought, ed. E. Forget and R.A. Lobdell, 31-53. Aldershot - iggGa. 'On Modelling Malthus's Growth Theory.' Unpublished manuscript Winch, D. 1983. 'Higher Maxims: Happiness versus Wealth in Malthus and Ricardo.' In That Nobele Science of Politics, ed. S. Collini, D. Winch, andj. Burrow, 63-90. Cambridge - 1987. Malthus. Oxford — !993- 'Robert Malthus: Christian Moral Scientist, Arch-Demoralizer, or Implicit Secular Utilitarian?' Utilitas 5/2 (November), 239-54 Wrigley, Edward A. ig83b. 'Malthus's Model of a Pre-industrial Economy.' In Malthus Past and Present, ed. J. Dupaquier, A. Fauve-Chamoux, and E. Grebenik, 111-24. London and New York V

OTHER SECONDARY WORKS

Allington, Nigel. 1977. Review of Huskisson (1830). In History of Economic Thought Newsletter 18 (Spring), 23-8 Arnon, Arie. 1991. Thomas Tooke: Pioneer of Monetary Theory. Aldershot Baumol, W.J. 1983. 'Marx and the Iron Law of Wages.' American Economic Review 83/2 (May), 303-8 Becker, G.S., and W.J. Baumol. 1952. The Classical Monetary Theory: The Outcome of the Discussion.' Economica, 19 (November), 355-96. In Essays in Economic Thought: Aristotle to Marshall, ed. J J. Spengler and W.R. Allen, 753-72. Chicago 1960 Blaug, Mark. 1985. Ricardian Economics: A Historical Study. New Haven, CT Bowley, Marian. 1973. Studies in the History of Economic Theory before 1870. London Brewer, A. 1987. Turgot: Founder of Classical Economics.' Economica 54 (November) 417-28

REFERENCES 1021

Carman, Edwin. 1917. A History of the Theories of Production and Distribution in English Political Economy from 1776 to 1848. 3d ed., London Coats, A.W. 1971. 'The Classical Economists and the Labourer.' In The Classical Economists and Economic Policy, ed. A.W. Coats, 144-79. London Dow, A. 1984. 'The Hauteur of Adam Smith: An Unpublished Letter from James Anderson of Monkshill.' Scottish Journal of Political Economy 31/3, 284-5 Eltis, Walter. 1984. The Classical Theory of Economic Growth. London - 1985. 'Ricardo on Machinery and Technological Unemployment.' In The Legacy of Ricardo, ed. G.A. Caravale, 257-84. London Faccarello, G. 1982. 'Sraffa versus Ricardo: The Historical Irrelevance of the "Corn-Profit" Model.' Economy and Society 11 (May), 122-37 Fetter, F.W. 1957. 'Introduction.' In The Economic Writings of Francis Horner in the 'Edinburgh Review,' 1-22. New York - I965a. Development of British Monetary Orthodoxy, I7Q7-I875. Cambridge, MA - I965b. 'Economic Controversy in the British Reviews, 1802-1850.' Economica 32 (November), 424-37 - 1980. The Economist in Parliament. Durham, NC Gibbard, Keith. 1994. 'Hollander's Textual Interpretation of Ricardian Growth Theory: A Reconsideration.' History of Political Economy 26/3 (Fall), 465-86 Gordon, B. 1970. Economic Doctrine and Tory Liberalism, 1824-1830. London Gordon, H. Scott. 1971. 'The Ideology of Laissez-Faire.' In The Classical Economists and Economic Policy, ed. A.W. Coats, 180-205. London Grampp, W.D. 1960. The Manchester School of Economics. Stanford - 1965. Economic Liberalism. II: The Classical View. New York Groenewegen, P.D. 1983. 'Turgot's Place in the History of Economic Thought: A Bicentenary Estimate.' History of Political Economy 15/4 (Winter), 585-616 Himmelfarb, G. 1984. The Idea of Poverty: England in the Early Industrial Age. New York Hollander, Samuel. 1973. The Economics of Adam Smith. Toronto - 1979. The Economics of David Ricardo. Toronto - 1985. The Economics of John Stuart Mill. Oxford - 1987. Classical Economics. Oxford - iggib. 'On the Endogeneity of the Margin and Related Issues in Ricardian Economics.' Journal of the History of Economic Thought 13/2 (Fall), 159-74 - i994a. 'Economic Theory and Policy: An Introduction to John Stuart Mill's Political Economy. In Economic Thought and Political Theory, ed. D. Reisman, 63-101. Boston - I994b. 'On the Textual Interpretation of Ricardian Growth Theory:

1022 REFERENCES

The "New View" Confirmed (Again).' History of Political Economy 26/3 (Fall), 487-500 - I995b. Ricardo - The New Vieiu. London Keynes, J.M. 1933. 'Alfred Marshall.' In Essays in Biography, 150-66. London Laidler, D. 1972. 'Thomas Tooke on Monetary Reform.' In Essays in Honour of Lord Robbins, ed. M. Peston and B. Corry, 168-86. London Landry, A. 1958. 'Les Idees de Quesnay sur la population.' In Francois Quesnay et la Physiocratie, ed. A. Sauvy, I, 11-49. Paris Langer, G.F. 1987. The Coming of Age of Political Economy, 1815-1825. New York Levy, D. 1976. 'Ricardo and the Iron Law: A Correction of the Record.' History of Political Economy 8/'2 (Summer) 235-52 Meek, R.L. 1962. The Economics of Physiocracy. London O'Brien, D.P. 1970. J.R. McCulloch: A Study in Classical Economics. London — 1975. The Classical Economists. Oxford - 1988. 'Classical Reassessments.' In W.O. Thweatt, ed., Classical Political Economy, 179-220. Boston Peach, T. 1988. 'David Ricardo: A Review of Some Interpretative Issues.' In Classical Political Economy, ed. W.O. Thweatt, 103-31. Boston Robbins, L.C. 1952. The Theory of Economic Policy in English Classical Political Economy. London - 1958. Robert Torrens and the Evolution of Classical Economics. London - 1968. The Theory of Economic Development in the History of Economic Thought. London Samuelson, P.A. 1978. 'The Canonical Classical Model of Political Economy. 'Journal of Economic Literature 16 (December), 1415-34 — 1991. 'Sraffa's Other Leg.' Economic Journal 101 (May), 570-4 Semmel, B. 1970. The Rise of Free Trade Imperialism: Classical Political Economy, the Empire of Free Trade and Imperialism. Cambridge Skourtos, M.S. 1991. 'Corn Models in the Classical Tradition: P. Sraffa Considered Historically.' Cambridge Journal of Economics 15/2 (June), 215-28 Smith, V.E. 1951. The Classicists' Use of Demand.' Journal of Political Economy 59 (June), 242-57 Sockwell, W.D. 1994. Popularizing Classical Economics: Henry Brougham and William Ellis. New York Sowell, T. 1974. Classical Economics Reconsidered. Princeton, NJ Sraffa, Piero. 1951. 'Introduction.' In Ricardo, Works and Correspondence, I, xiii-lxii Stigler, GJ. 1965. Essays in the History of Economics, Chicago — 1981. 'Review of Hollander, The Economics of David Ricardo.'Journal of Economic Literature 19 (March), 100-2 Thweatt, William O. 1976. 'James Mill and the Early Development of Comparative Advantage.' History of Political Economy 8/2 (Summer), 207-34

REFERENCES 1023

Tucker, G.S.L. 1954. The Origin of Ricardo's Theory of Profits.' Economica 21 (November), 320-33 - 1960. Progress and Profits in British Economic Thought: 1650-1850. Cambridge - 1978. The Political Economy of William Huskisson. Research Report no. 46, University of Newcastle, NSW von Hayek, F.A. 1932. 'A Note on the Development of the Doctrine of "Forced Savings."' Quarterly Journal ofEconomics 47 (November), 123-33 Waterman, A.M.C. i996b. 'Why Keynes Thought that William Paley Was the First of the Cambridge Economists.' Cambridge Journal of Economics. In press Winch, D., ed. 1966. James Mill: Selected Economic Writings. Edinburgh and London VII GENERAL ECONOMIC THEORY AND ITS HISTORY

Becker, G.S. 1988. 'Family Economics and Macro Behavior.' American Economic Review 78 (March), 1-13 Blaug, Mark. 1980. The Methodology of Economics or How Economists Explain. Cambridge - 1985. Economic Theory in Introspect. 4th ed., Cambridge Broome,John. 1991. Weighing Goods: Equality, Uncertainty and Time. Cambridge, MA Garegnani, P. 1991. 'The Labour Theory of Value: "Detour" or Technical Advance.' In Marx and Modern Economic Analysis, ed. G.A. Caravale, I, 97-118. Aldershot Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 1993. Economics and Evolution: Bringing Life Back into Economics. Oxford Hutchison, T.W. 1978. On Revolutions and Progress in Economic Knowledge. Cambridge Klein, Lawrence R. 1966. The Keynesian Revolution, 2d ed. New York Lloyd, P.J. 1969. 'Elementary Geometric/Arithmetic Series and Early Production Theory. 'Journal of Political Economy 77 (January/February), 21-34 Meltzer, Allan H. 1988. Keynes's Monetary Theory: A Different Interpretation. Cambridge Myint, H. 1948. Theories of Welfare Economics. London Patinkin, D. 1982. Anticipations of the General Theory? And Other Essays on Keynes. Chicago Robbins, L.C. 1970. The Evolution of Modern Economic Theory. London Schumpeter, J.A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. New York Sraffa, Piero. 1960. Production of Commodities by Means of Commodities. Cambridge Taylor, O.H. 1960. A History of Economic Thought. New York

1024 REFERENCES

Viner, Jacob. 1924. Canada's Balance of International Indebtedness, 1900-1913. Cambridge, MA — 1937. Studies in the Theory of International Trade. New York - 1958. The Long View and the Short. Glencoe, IL von Hayek, F.A. 1935. Prices and Production, 2d ed. London VIII BIBLIOGRAPHICAL WORKS

Fetter, F.W. 1953. The Authorship of Economic Articles in the Edinburgh Review, 1802-47. Journal of Political Economy 61 (June), 232-59 Hollander, Samuel. I99ia. 'New Editions of Malthus.' Utilitas 3/2 (November), 303-10 - I992b. 'On Malthus's Physiocratic References.' History of Political Economy 24/2 (Summer), 369-80 - 1996. 'On the Authorship of "Spence on Commerce" in the Edinburgh Review, 1808.' Victorian Periodicals Review 29/4 (Winter), 315-29 IX WORKS ON ECONOMIC, POLITICAL, AND SOCIAL HISTORY

Barnes, D.G. 1930. A History of the English Corn Laws: 1660-1846. London Blaug, Mark. 1963. 'The Myth of the Old Poor Law and the Making of the New.' Journal of Economic History1 23/2 (June), 151—84 Clough, S.B. 1964. France: A History of National Economies, 1789-1939. New York Crouzet, F. 1982. The Victorian Economy. New York Eversley, D.E.C. 1959. Social Theories of Fertility and the Malthusian Debate. Oxford Fay, C.R. 1932. The Corn Laws and Social England. Cambridge Feavearyear, Albert. 1963. The Pound Sterling: A History of English Money, 2d, ed., Oxford Gouraud, C. 1854. Histoire de la politique commerciale de la France, 2 vols. Paris Gras, N.S.B. 1915. The Evolution of the English Corn Market. Cambridge Halevy, E. 1955. The Growth of Philosophic Radicalism. Trans. Mary Morris. Boston Hilton, Boyd. 1977. Corn, Cash, Commerce: The Economic Policies of the Tory Governments, 1815-1830. Oxford Hueckel, Glenn. 1981. 'Agriculture during Industrialization.' In The Economic History of Britain since 1700, ed. R. Floud and D. McCloskey, I: 1700-1860, 182-203. Cambridge Huzel, J.P. 1969. 'Malthus, the Poor Law, and the Population in Early Nineteenth-Century England.' Economic History Review 22/3 (December) , 430-52 - 1980. 'The Demographic Impact of the Old Poor Law: More Reflexions on Malthus.' Economic History Review 33/3 (August), 367-81

REFERENCES 1025

Lee, R.D., and R.S. Schofield. 1981. 'British Population in the Eighteenth Century.' In The Economic History of Britain since 1700, ed. R. Floud and D. McCloskey, I: 1700-1860, 17-35. Cambridge Mitchell, B.R. 1962. Abstract of British Historical Statistics. Cambridge Smart, William. 1910-17. Economic Annals of the Nineteenth Century (2 vols.). London Stephen, L. 1900. The English Utilitarians (3 vols). London Tranter, N.L. 1981. The Labour Supply, 1780-1860.' In The Economic History of Britain since 1700, ed. R. Floud and D. McCloskey, I: 1700-1860, 204-26. Cambridge Viner, J. 1972. The Role of Providence in the Social Order. Philadelphia Wrigley, E.A. ig83a. 'The Growth of Population in Eighteenth-Century England: A Conundrum Resolved.' Past and Present 98 (February), 121-50

This page intentionally left blank

GENERAL INDEX

Abbreviations: Throughout the index the following abbreviations are used in subheadings: M. R.

= Malthus = Ricardo

Essay = Essay on Population Principles = Principles of Political Economy

absolute advantage 549, 551-2 aggregate demand: and capital scarcity 80-1; deficient 521-2, 597-8; and distribution of property 508, 562-3, 574-5, 590-1; effect of reduced government expenditure 609; impact of machinery 57O-3; and improved distribution 542-3; and increase in national product 524-6, 587-8; inequality with aggregate supply 541. 585, 628; influence of M. on Keynes 585, 609-10, 629, 1004-5, 1006-8; for labour 413; lags in 77-8; and national debt 982-3; postwar collapse 505-6, 580-3, 605-7, 609-12, 626-7, 833-4; and profit rate 146-7, 149, 152-5, 453~5, 495, 758; sectorally differentiated 453-5; and trade 410, 543, 585, 586, 587-9, 606 aggregate output, and profit rate 85, 147-8 aggregate supply: impact on profit and prices of deficient 559-62; inequality with aggregate demand 541, 585, 628; see also excess supply; gluts aggregate value: demand-supply as deter-

minant 166, 247, 996; and improved distribution of commodities 542-3, 573, 587, 602-3, 618; see also national income 'agricultural bias': from M.'s physiocratic links 363-72, 391-3, 405-11, 811; and M.'s protectionism 370-1, 809, 832-4, 849, 863, 866; R.'s argument against 379-82, 833; Smith's 379-8o, 385 agricultural dependency 809-10, 815-17 agricultural expansion 75-6,97-100,103-7, 116-27, 752-4; and corn price 99-100, 104-5, 763-5; and declining corn wage 127, 211; maximum in theory and practice 183-5; and money wage 151; in multisectoral system 210-12; and new technology 590, 753-4, 757-8, 766-7; and population growth 64-6, 197, 203, 354, 879-80; possibility of reduced cost 753-4, 757-8, 766-7; and profit rate 70, 75-6, 97-100, 114, 116-27, 129-32, 757-8; — M.-R. correspondence on 116-27; — M.'s stimulatory effect 70, 114, 116-25, 757-8; — R-'s falling 125-7, 129-30, 1312; and rising demand 97-100, 104-5, 108-9, H2, 114, 212; rising real cost of i°3-7> 752-4; stimulated by manufacturing 364; and trade restriction 114, 763-4; see also corn surplus agricultural productivity 72-90, 136-56, 739-83; and capital employed 140-1, 143-4; effect of land improvement 55-6, 753-4, 757-8, 766-7, 778-9, 781; M.-R.

1028 I N D E X correspondence on 72-90, 97-8, 136—56; and money price of corn 105-6; M.'s estimates of 741—7, 752-83; M.'s optimism on trends 741, 745, 761-5, 766-8, 772-3, 783; and profit rate 70-90, 97-9, 130-4, 136-56, 161-2, 757-61; — indirect effect conceded by M. 82-90, 98-9, 130, 133-4, 471-2; — productivity as limiting principle 70, 164, 437-8, 448-51; — R.'s direct effect denied by M. 70, 72-82, 161-2, 966-7; — R.'s direct effect finally admitted by M. 213, 498; — secular decline 130-4, 145, 437; and real wages 138; and rent 140-4, 147-8; and value 319-20; wartime experience 747-8, 749-80; see also corn surplus; diminishing returns; productivity agricultural profit rate: and agricultural extensions 75-6, 97-100,116-27, 129-30; and agricultural productivity 70—90, 97-9, 130-4, 136-56, 161-2, 757-8; and agricultural protection 74-7, 135-6, 156, 171-2, 780-1, 842-6, 865; corn-profit model 446-59; determination of 74, 78, 101-2, 773-81; and general profit rate 75, 439-40, 446-59, 460-1, 463-4; M.-R. correspondence on 72-90, 97-8, 116-27, 136-56; relationship with manufacturing profit rate 87-8, 118, 124-7, 128-31, 446-59, 778; secular decline 90-3; upward trend 757—8, 774-6 agricultural protection 762-9, 807—71; and agricultural profit rate 74-7, 135-6, 156, 171-2, 780-1, 842-6, 865; and balanced growth 834-42, 851, 867, 993-4; and capital diminution 75-7; corn-import restrictions 610-12, 814-15, 836-42; and corn price 75-6, 374~5, 732, 747-52, 825-30, 831-2; cost of abandoning 857-61; and diminishing returns 810, 820-3, 864; efficiency perspective 550-1; impact on prices and wages 732, 747-52, 820-3, 825-30; and importance of agriculture to national prosperity 370-1; M.-Horner correspondence on 72, 810, 820-1, 824, 83on, 834, 845n, 858n, 86sn; M.'s case for 762-9, 812-24, 825-32, 834-6; M.'s inconsistency 989; M.'s later withdrawal of support 410, 809-10, 840, 846-67, 1005; M.'s physiocratic 'agricultural bias' 370—1, 809, 832-4, 849, 863, 866; and national debt 826-8, 839, 968; and prudential control 848-9, 854; R.'s countervailing duty and drawback 851-4, 858-9, 86on;

and seasonal variability of crops 815, 837; as second-best solution 813-14, 815-17, 829-30, 856-7; for security of supply 809-10, 815-17,818-20, 828-30, 833, 858-9; Smith's countervailing tariffs 823, 853; and stability of prices 828-30, 831-2, 838-9, 858-9; to balance industrial bias 809-11, 812-14, 817, 823-4, 840-2, 859; and unreliability of foreign supplies 818-20; unsocial tendency of 807-9, 840, 842-5, 846, 850-1; utilitarian case for 830-2; see also Corn Laws; corn-export bounty; free trade; tariffs agricultural sector: absolute decline in workforce 204-5; accelerating production 6l-2; considered as leading sector by M. 87, 90, 93, 114, 141, 367; considered not to be leading sector by M. 96, 112; distribution of activity with manufacturing 39-42; new technology and increasing returns i86n, 193-4, 465-7, 753-8, 766-7, 782, 847; as sole source of surplus 353-4, 359-6o, 365-79 agricultural subsidies 884, 892 agricultural surplus 355-63, 365-9 agricultural systems 174-6 agriculture. See corn-manufacturing price ratios; food production; land improvement; sectoral relationships Aikin, John 206-7 America. See United States Anderson, James 17, 52-3, 395, 975 Arrow, K. 219 Attwood, Mathias 542n Attwood, Thomas 542n, 599n Australia 57—8 Bailey, Samuel 2?on, 272, 293; Dissertation on Value 336, 337; M.'s answers to criticism from 336-44 balance of trade: and bullion flows 677-710; effect of imbalance upon domestic prices 679-80; effect of subsidies to foreign powers 68o-l, 684, 698-707, 709-10; met in gold 679-80; non-monetary disturbances in 679-84, 706-7; and Thornton's Paper Credit 679-81 balanced growth: competition of capitals avoided by l8l-2, 835-6, 860; government intervention to promote 810-11, 812-14, 823-4, 836-40, 867; and protectionism 834-42, 851, 993-4 Bank of England: banking policy 644-60; depreciated paper as legal tender 641-2,

I N D E X 1029 653-4; financing exports 5440; on foreign exchange and currency 685-6, 977n; M. advocates slow return to convertibility 653, 674; M. attacks 644-66; M. prefers American system 652-3, 676; private interests and mismanagement 647-8, 650, 654; private ownership of 652-4, 656-7, 658; Restriction Act 645, 652, 664-5, 674-5; R- proposes state commission to replace 656-7 Barnes, D.G. 8s6n Barton, John 421-2 Baumol, WJ. See Becker, G.S., and WJ. Baumol Becker, G.S., 784, 785-6 Becker, G.S., and WJ. Baumol 629n Bengal 715-16, 719 Bentham, Jeremy 690; utilitarianism 91 in, 917, 918, 927n, 941, 943" Berkeley, Bishop, 'wall of brass' 811, 835 birth rates 786-7, 800-1, 876-9; and birthdeath ratios 59-61, 795~6, 799, 800-1, 978-9; population growth and declining 6l, 198, 203 Blake, William eogn, 666, 684-5 Blaug, Mark 23in, 272n, 785, 8o8n, 96gn Bonar, J. 3in, 8o8n, go6n, 9o8n, gun; M.'s moral and theological approach gi8n, 92in,936-7n, 943n Bosanquet, Charles 646-7; R.'s Reply to Bosanquet 657-8, 683, 6g2n, 6g5n bounties: effect on prices 244-5; R-'s drawback proposal 851-4; see also corn-export bounty Bowley, Marian 23on Bridge, Bewick g84n Britain: change from exporter to importer of corn 744-5, 750-2, 763, 798; foodproduction growth 19—20, 22—3; land scarcity 37-9; as mixed economy 179-82; past population-growth slowness 17, 35-9, 787-8, 793. 794; population-growth acceleration 17, 49, 6l-2, 785-6, 788-9, 799-802; postwar depression 595-615; seen as thinly inhabited 38, 50-1, 742; wartime expansion 586-95 Broome,John 22On Brougham, Henry 4o6n, 871 Brown, James. See Ricardo-Brown in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE

Buchanan, David 241, 354, 373, 375-6, 378, 381,382 bullion: changed or unchanged in war 662-6; controversy over 'value' of 631,

660-6; gains from trade in 557-8; infinitely elastic demand 682; trade extension and importation of 558-9; universal acceptability of 632—5, 682—3; see a^° bullion flows; Bullionism and Bullionist controversy; convertibility Bullion Committee 630, 635, 639, 645 bullion flows: and balance of trade 677-710; effect of bad harvest 679-80, 684, 688-90, 692, 696-8, 702-3; and low domestic manufacturing prices 693, 696-8, 700, 708-9; and money as cheapest export 677, 680-1, 688-92, 694, 698; M.-R. correspondence on 692-708; and redundant currency 678, 679-81, 685-8, 694, 698; return to trade-balance equilibrium 681-4, 691, 693, 708-9; R.'s 'rational expectations' interpretation 690-1; for subsidies to foreign powers 680-1, 684, 689, 695, 698-707, 709-10; Thornton's theory on 679-80 Bullionism and Bullionist controversy 630-66, 1003; definition of depreciation 637-8; M.-R. correspondence on 656-60; M.'s position in 631-66, 667-9; see a^° gold; precious metals; silver Cambridge School of economists, M. as first of 9 Cannan, Edwin: diminishing returns 13, 52-3, 739, 740; and M.'s arithmetic/ geometric ratios 13, 14, 16, 49, 53 'canonical' classical growth model 5, 173, 766, 797, 872, 963, 979; and hard-line Malthusianism 872-3 capital: and agricultural productivity 140-1, 143-4, 148; effect of changes in money supply on 667; movement from land to manufacturing 87-8, 132, 744; M.'s alleged neglect of fixed 5O7n; M.'s treatment of residual 310-11, 478-9; wartime destruction and postwar replacement of 614, 617, 698, 757, 776; see also capital accumulation; capital demand; capital redundancy; capital supply capital accumulation: and competition of capitals 90-1, 101-2, 506-7; effect on wages and prices 39-41, 63; effect on wealth 510-11; excessive 517-18, 529-32, 564-6, 756-7, 1003; and fertility of land 86-7,98; in manufacturing 66, 96, 128-9, 147, 154; optimum rate 611; and oscillatory process 63; and population growth 535-6, 538-9, 797-8, 800-1; and profits

1030 I N D E X 90-1, 98-9, 102, 128, 147, 154; and rent 102; R.'s view of 517-18, 523-4, 530; Smith on 96, 192, 453, 774~5; and sustainable growth 507, 514-26, 542-7, 617-18; treated as independent of agriculture lO2~3n; see also saving capital demand 144-7, 15!~3, 156-7, 166, 494-7, 531-2; and capital supply 144-5, 151-3, I56n; labour demand relative to 151-3, 156-7, 166; limited or unlimited 146-7; and profit rate 494-7, 531-2, 586, 596 capital redundancy: and land improvement 744; and profit rate 776-7; and recovery from stagnation 620-3 capital supply: and aggregate demand 80—1; and capital demand 144-5, 151—3. I56n; as determinant of profit rate 73-82, 138-9, 452-3, 494-7, 499-500, 774—81; and excess aggregate demand 79-81; for land improvement 24, 56, 176, 193; scarcity in development context 580-3 capital theory of price 261, 493n, 494n capitalists: excessive accumulation 517—18, 530-2, 564-5, 566; inadequate consumption by 515-19, 564-6 Cazenove, J. 463—4, 5i4n; as editor of Principles (1836) 486n, 534n, 559n, 77On, 846 celibacy. See chastity and celibacy; marriage; prudential control Chadwick, Edwin 92on Chalmers, George 775n Chalmers, Thomas 944; correspondence, see Malthus-Chalmers in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE chastity and celibacy 29, 888-90, 935-6, 939; see also marriage; prudential control children: employment of 419, 430, 431-2, 778-80; state and abandoned 898-9 China 416, 722-3; forced population expansion 33, 34, 44; population and food supplies 28, 33, 58, 794-5 class: and case for protectionism 831-2; effects of wartime inflation on 667-8, 674-5, 826-8; and social structure 893; see also labouring classes; landowning class; middle class classical economics: 'happiness' in 917; M.'s role 1002-5; value measurement in 272-3 Clough, S.B. 858n Cobbett, William 8s6n Colquhoun, Patrick logn, 423n

commercial systems: checks to growth 176-9; competition in 177-9, 238, 835; M.'s opposition to 364-5, 810-11, 812-20, 834-5, 839-40 Commons, John 9 communism, M.'s objections to 22-5, 881-2, 9o8n, 909-11, 920 comparative-costs doctrine 164, 547-52, 549n, 552; distribution of precious metals 547-8; R.'s 547-52; see also international trade competition: in 'commercial' economy 177-9, 238, 835; protection from in mixed economy 180-1 competition of capitals (Smithian): avoided by balanced growth 181-2, 835-6, 861; and capital accumulation 90-1, 101-2, 506-7; and Law of Markets 144-5, 146-7, 483; M. claims profit rate determined by 72, 130, 133, 166, 451-3, 780-1, 963; in manufacturing sector 138, 436, 447, 464, 467-8, 485-6; rejection by Ricardians 971-2; and trade 465-6, 543 Condorcet, A.N. de 37, 68, 784, go8n, 939, 945 confidence, failure of 638, 669, 673-4 consumption: by servants 565-7; diminished in postwar depression 609-10; and excessive saving 514-26, 537, 597-8, 1003; inadequacy of landlords' and capitalists' 515-19, 564-6; limits to 518; middle-class 562, 583, 590-1, 619; and profit rate 528-9; and sustainable growth 507, 514-29, 537, 564-7; 'unproductive' 508, 520-1, 528-9, 563-7, 620-2, 624; wartime increase in 593-5, 613; working-class 507, 526-9 contraception: outside marriage 935, 944-5; within marriage Sgon, 945, 048 convertibility 635-6; deflationary consequence of return to 623, 652-3, 673—4; and effect of monetary expansion 666-71; and gold reserves 654-5; and stable purchasing power 632; see also bullion; currency redundancy; gold; paper currency corn: change from exporter to importer 744-5, 750-2, 763, 798; danger of reliance on imports 809-10, 815-17; effect on bullion outflows of crop failure 679-80, 684, 688-90, 692, 696-8, 702-3; foreign demand for 96, 108-10, 114, 129; money price of 99-100, 104-5; natural value 317-18; rising demand for 97-100, 104-5,

I N D E X 1031 108-10, 112, 212; rising real cost of 752-4; see also corn-export bounty; cornimport restrictions; corn measure of value; corn price; corn-profit model; corn surplus; corn wage; imports, corn corn-export bounty 745-6, 751-2, 768-9, 770-1, 814-15, 821-2; and danger of excessive growth in manufacturing sector 812-14; direct and indirect effects 746-7; M. on 219, 745-7, 751-3, 768-9; R. critical of M. on 238-9; Smithian 92n, 219, 238-9, 7i2n, 751, 8i5n; see aho agricultural protection; free trade corn-import restrictions 610-12, 814—15, 836-42; see also agricultural protection; Corn Laws; free trade Corn Laws: changes 8i4n, 856, 868-71; and corn price 768n, 770-1, 850-1; as corrective not protective measure 810, 823-4, 830; and international money price differentials 724n, 730-1, 735n; M.'s support for 628n; M.'s support for repeal of 855-6, 861; as obstacle to global free trade 809, 8ll, 857-9; and profit rates 74n, 129, 163; redressing sectoral imbalance 824; see also agricultural protection; corn-export bounty corn-manufacturing price ratios 121-2, 124-5, 126-31, 396-9, 759-60; as check on population growth 176, 194—5; in mixed economy 180, 181; postwar 759-60 corn measure of value 106-7, 277, 285-9, 298-9, 301-2; homogeneity of input and output 435n, 456-7; M.'s linked cornlabour index 277, 285-9, 301-2; R.'s criticism of 277, 288-9; Smith's 106-7, 286, 298-9 com price: advantages of high 134—6, 163, 759—61; and agricultural expansion 99-100, 104-5, 763—5; and agricultural protection 75-6, 374~5, 732, 747-52, 825-30, 831-2; and corn-export bounty 745-6, 751-2, 768-9, 770-1, 821-2; and costs H7-i8n, 127, 770-1; declining 92-3, 750-2; and diminishing returns 88-9, 103-7, 134-6, 394-403, 745-52, 772-3; effect of Com Laws 768n, 770-1, 850-1; effect of manufacturing expansion 238; governing other prices (Smithian) 81,126, I49n,239-40, 974; and international competitiveness 815-16, 822-3; and international differentials 135, 714-21, 760-1; M.-R. correspon-

dence on 134-6, 163, 759-6; and money wage 137,142-3, 238-40, 413-16; 'monopoly' or 'necessary' 396-9; and profit rate 88-9, 92-3, 116-19, 142, 777-9; and rent 108-10, 395-8; rising 116-17,128-9, 134-6,163, 759-61,830-1; value of precious metals measured in 106-7; and wealth 769-70; see also cornmanufacturing price ratios corn-profit model 435n, 865, 962; criticisms of interpretation of M.'s theory as 459-64; M.'s profit-rate theory as 4, 172, 435-7, 446-8, 454-9, 727 corn surplus 114, 118-25,197,198,365; and demand from manufacturing sector 365; and increased purchasing power 114; manufacturing sector dependent on 114, 118-19, 122-5, 359-6o, 363-4; and marginal costs 118-19, 12O-1; in money terms 122-3; and population growth 197, 198; and reduced corn wage 120-1; see aho physiocracy; surplus corn wage: and commodity wage 4i5n; constancy 187-90, 325, 440-1, 488, 500; dependent on demand and supply of corn 415; falling 100, 116, 120-1, 127, 211; fluctuations 414-17; maintained by prudential control 187-90, 201, 803, 879-80; and money wage 150-1; and oscillatory process 43-7, 63, 210-11; and population growth 62, 168-9, 187-90, 429-33, 801; as regulating principle in profits 437-8, 448, 463; secular decline 150—1, 437-46; used in M.'s revised profit-rate analysis 444-6; see also downward wage path; wages correspondence: for reference to individual letters please consult INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; correspondence, M.-R. 5, 8-9; 1813-14 70-94; 1815-19 114-72; 1823 321—33; on agricultural expansion and profit rate 116-27; on agricultural productivity and profit rate 72-90, 97-8, 136-56, 758-61; on bullion flows 692-708; on Bullionism 656-60; on com price 134-6, 163, 759-61; on M.'s price theory 247-8, 268-9; on R.'s Essay on Profits 116-34; on R.'s 'New View' 136-56; on R.'s Principles 163-7; on sustainable growth 519-21; on The Measure of Value 321-33; on transfer problem 692-708; on wage-profit relationship 156-60 cost: comparative-cost doctrine 164,

1032 I N D E X 547-52, 549°, 552; corn price and H7-i8n, 127, 770; corn surplus marginal 118-19, 120-1; effect of new technology 753-4. 757-8, 766-7; marginal cost of corn and cattle 256-61; private cost of families ign, 22, 33; R.'s confusion of with value 276-8; rising cost of marginal land 103-7; variation in land 103-4; see also production costs cost-price analysis: long-run cost-pricing 273, 996; M.'s Principles 242-8 Costabile, L. 5O7n; and M.'s theory of profits 459-61, 49on, 497n; and M.'s value theory 4,272-4 Costabile, L., and B. Rowthorn 49?n, 5O?n country banks 644, 654, 655, 675 cow grants 898 Crouzet, F. 8s8n currency depreciation. See depreciation currency redundancy: causes of 683,694-7; as motive for trading 695-6; R. insists sole cause of bullion flows 678, 679-81, 685-8, 694, 698 de Marchi, N.B., and R.P. Sturges 9 de Sismondi, J.C.L. Simonde 458n, 615-16, 971; and machinery 56gn, 573n, 575; and M.'s debt to Physiocrats 354, 373, 375-6, 378, 381, 382; and national income 525, 526n De Yonge judgment 641 death. See mortality rates deductive method: M.'s case for 949-50, 951-65; M.'s case in practice 961-4 deflation: and contraction in money supply 666; and purely paper circulation 649-50, 657-8; and return to convertibility 623, 652-3, 673-4; and trade liberalization 825-6; see also inflation demand: for agricultural and manufactured goods 109-10; derived 596, 598; effect of high corn prices on 119; effective (effectual) 74n, 79-81, 84-5, 235-6, 296, 346-7; excess 80-1; extent and intensity of 218, 227-32, 23in, 233-4, 236-7; foreign 96, 108-9, H4; in High Price of Provisions 225-6; increasing for corn 97-8, 99-100, 104-5, 108-10, 112, 212; interdependent or independent of supply 104, 112, 377; for leisure 536-7, 577, 578-8o, 583-4, 968; M. defines 227; for manufactures 76-7, 83, 109-10, 139, 141, I49n, 155, 163; and money sacrifice 218, 227; M.'s production dimension

223-4, 227; in Principles 226-38; shifts and movements in demand curves 229-32, 233-4, 594; see also aggregate demand; demand-supply theory; elasticity of demand demand-supply theory 104; analytical limitations 238-42; constraint on applicability to food 240-2; as determinant of value 166, 247, 996; M.'s long-term analysis 246; and price determination 226n, 227-34, 237-8, 273, 399, 962; see also exchange value; value demobilization, postwar 607-8, 624 demographic data: accuracy of 32, 48-9, 67n, 788-9; census returns 59, 788-9, 790, 795-6, 799-800, 946; and demographic trends 784-804 depopulation 22, 54-5 depreciation 636-44; anti-Bullionists deny existence of 645; and excess currency 636-7, 639-42, 653; as excess of market over mint price of metal 637-8, 642; as excess paper or high demand for gold 645, 652, 656; and lack of confidence in paper 638; M.'s account of 1797-1808 638-9 M.'s account of 1808-11 639-42; rise in bullion or fall in paper 631,660-6; rise in bullion or fall in purchasing power 642-4 depression. See postwar depression; stagnation devaluation 660 development, stagnation in context of 575-83 differential rent 103-7, 110-12, 256-61, 372, 740, 749-50 diminishing returns 27-33, 47~56, 72-6, 96-107, 394-403; accepted by M. as limiting factor only 70, 164, 437-8, 441-4, 448-51, 996; and agricultural protection 810, 820-3, 864; and corn price 88-9, 103-7, 134-6, 394-403, 745-52, 772-3; and decelerating population growth 184-5, 198-9, 795-6; and downward wage path 441-4; effect of land improvement on 55-6, 753-4, 757-8, 766-7, 778-9; and free trade 747-50; inconsistent with M.'s physiocratic leanings 371-2, 380, 394-403; and land scarcity 27-33, 47~56, 97-8, 742-4; M.'s acceptance of R.'s proportionality theorem 97-8, 442-3, 472-9, 486-8, 498; and M.'s arithmetic/geometric ratios 13-16; M.'s case for insulation of profit rates from 70-6, 86-7, 95, 97-8;

I N D E X 1033 M.'s denial of 765; M.'s early statements to Horner on 72, 740, 747, 810, 820-2, 993; M.'s insistence that effect is only on labour 70-6, 86-7, 95, 151; M.'s position traced from first Essay to posthumous Principles 739-52, 754~5; and population growth 55-6, 184-5, 198-9, 795-6; and rent 95, 96-103, 372; R.'s proportionality theorem 155, 158-60, 167-71, 251-4, 470-6, 480-92; shared between capital and labour 277-8, 325, 437-8, 442-3, 475-6. 480-92, 996; short-term 26, 55-6; see also agricultural productivity; agricultural profit rate; land scarcity; profit rate distribution of commodities, and aggregate value 542-3, 573. 587, 602-3, 618 distribution of income 562-3, 582-3,620-2, 893,911-14,948 distribution of property: and aggregate demand 508, 562-3, 574~5, 59-i; and law of primogeniture 590-1, 619; redistribution through inflation 667-8, 674-5, 826-8; and sustainable growth 562-3, 98l-2 distribution theory: M.'s inverse wageprofit relation 476-92, 501; R.'s inverse wage-profit relation 155,158-60,167-71, 251-4, 47O-6, 479-83; R.'s proportionality theorem 155, 158-60, 167-71, 251-4, 470-6, 480-92 doctrine of proportions 423-5, 427-9, 562-3, 567, 620-2, 840-1, 980-6; and equality 562—3,620—2; and industrial bias 840-1; and labour demand 423-5, 427-9; mathematics as appropriate procedure for 950, 984-6 Dorfman, R. 8o8n Dupont de Nemours, P.S. 375n, 403-4, 405; sees Essay as physiocratic 356, 406-7 Dupuit,J. 22in economic-model building 958-61, 967-9, 979 economics: contrasted with mathematics 950, 955-6. 984, 986; empirical dimension 964; general principles and stated exceptions 952-6; M. and R. differ on meaning of political economy 999-1000; as science 954-5, 958-9, 984-6 Edinburgh Review: M. virtually blacklisted over protectionism 867, 992; M.'s 'Depreciation of Paper Currency' (1811) 630, 632-40 passim, 645-8, 652-3, 666-71, 681-7; M.'s 'Pamphlets on the Bullion

Question' (1811) 631-2, 638-44, 648-55, 669-70, 672-4, 687-8 education: labour employed in 509-10; and prudential control 895-6, 909-10; role of government in 895-6 elasticity of demand 232, 233-4; for corn 593-4; and extended trade 544-6; inelastic for British goods abroad 682; infinitely elastic for bullion 682; and new technology 568-9 Ellis, William 610 Eltis, Walter 395, 5O7n, 844n; and M.'s oscillatory process 45, 46n emigration 903 employment: checks due to deficient demand 521-2; in disequilibrium conditions 164-5; effect of new technology 574-5, 996-7; full 429-33, 920; and percapita real wages 419; shift from 'unproductive' to 'productive' 515-17; and urbanization of workforce 204-6; of women and children 419, 430, 431-2, 778-80; see also unemployment Empson, William 808-9, 867, 943n, 992 equality: and doctrine of proportions 562-3,620-2; M.'s case for greater 562-3, 582-3, 620-2, 9H-14, 948 equilibrium analysis, M.'s predilection for long-run 949 equilibrium price: changes in 229-31, 233-4; R.'s interest in long-run 247-8 Essay on Population 13—69; 1798 version 16-47, 739, 741-3, 786-7, 881-5, 917-30; 1803 version 47-56, 238, 744-6, 786-7, 788-96, 812-20, 930-8; 1806/7 editions 56-62, 365-7, 746-7, 801-2, 812-20; 1817 revision 168-9, 173-213, 761-9, 796-802, 834-42; 1826 edition 848, 849-50; agricultural, commercial, and mixed systems 174-85, 810-11, 812-20, 834-6; agricultural productivity 739, 741-3, 744-7, 761-9; agricultural protection 762-5, 812-20, 834-42, 848, 849-50, 863, 864; checks to growth 36-9, 174-88, 193-9, 882-90, 897-8; diminishing returns 27-33, 47-56, 162, 739, 741-3, 744-7, 761-9; downward wage path 33-5; geometric and arithmetic ratios 16-17, 18-22, 49-50, 57-60, 795; land-based growth theory 27-33, 47~56, 182-8, 409-10; and land scarcity 182-8; methodology 9-10, 196-7, 961-2; oscillatory process 42-7, 63-6, 209-12, 213; population growth and food production 27—33,

1034 I N D E X 36-9, 42-66, 197-201, 207-12, 743-4, 787-8; prudential control 187-8, 189-93, 201, 202-3, 802-3, 881-5; role of government 892-911 on surplus 355-63, 365-9; theological utilitarianism 917-48; Weyland's criticisms answered 195-203, 207, 799, 978-9; see also population theory Essay on Profits (R.) 114, 116-34, 379-80, 758n; correspondence on 116-34; evaluation of 128-34; M.'s criticisms of 116, 995 Europe, population 28, 33, 35-8, 197-8, 787-8 Eversley, D.E.C. 942n excess supply: and fall in profit rate 597; of food 92, 241, 455; and money-wage flexibility 542, 613-14; and M.'s labour-commanded measure of value 336, 492-3; possibility of 162, 336, 501; and proportionality theory 493; temporary phenomenon 612—14; see also gluts; Law of Markets exchange rates: and labour input 154-5; M.-R. correspondence on 692-708; M.'s and R.'s close views on 677-9, 684-5, 686-8, 711; M.'s theory on remittances and 678, 679-92; R.'s theory of redundant currency as determinant 678, 679-81,685-8,694 expectations 22?n export sector: effect of improved export efficiency 678-9, 717-18, 723-4, 728n, 730-1, 860; effect on money value 715-16, 717-18, 731-2, 734-5; physiocratic contrast between corn and industrial exports 362-3; as uncertain indication of national wealth 355n, 371, 809, 834; see also corn-export bounty extent of demand 227-8, 230, 23ln, 236; and intensity of demand 218, 227-32, 23in,233-4 families: encouragement to have 29; earnings 208-9, 429-33, 778-80; happiness of life in 934-5; private cost of ign, 22, 33, 881 n; size of 904 family allowance 904 Fetter, F.W. 86?n finance, endogeneity of 558-62 Flew, A. 880, 928n, 929 Flinn, M.W. 8o8n flows, and stocks 31 food production: absolute limits 2O-1, 27-8, 57, 879-80; arithmetic growth of 18-22, 27-32, 50, 57, 59; constant per-

capita 43; effect of Poor Laws on 25-6, 743; living standards not solely dependent on 186-90; and manufacturing/ agriculture split 39-42; maximization 20, 183-4, 794-5; order of precedence: M.'s 42-3, 64-6, 83, 207-12, 247, 382, 387-9; — R.'s 66, 207-8, 210, 212, 219, 247; and oscillatory process 42-5, 209-12; and population growth 18-66, 197-201, 207-12, 743-4, 787-8; possibility of geometric rate of growth admitted 31-2; see also agricultural expansion; agricultural sector; diminishing returns France: corn-export restrictions 810, 828-20, 858, 993; differentials in value of precious metals 713 franchise, electoral 894, 906-7 free rider problem 909-10 free trade 136-7; Corn Laws as obstacle to global 809, 811, 857-9; and depressed economy 810,825n, 833; and diminishing returns 747-50; efficiency gains from 543-7, 55O-1, 832; and French export restrictions 810, 828-30, 858, 993; M. in favour of principle 828-30, 834, 968, 993; M.'s policy transition 856-65, 866-7, 993-4 not in agriculture 847-8; price fluctuations under 828—30; unfavourable impact of 370-1; and uniformity of prices across trading nations 7i3n; see also agricultural protection; Corn Laws; tariffs; trade policy French economics. See Physiocratic economics French Revolution 908 Friedman, Milton 6?2n gains from trade: in bullion prices 557-8; efficiency 543-7, 810, 832; M. and R. agree on 222-3; M. and R. differ on 548-9, 552-8; M.'s labour-commanded value 555—7; R.'s labour-embodied value 555 Ganilh, Charles 5ii-i2n Garegnani, P. 46on Gamier, Germain 298, 513-14 general profit rate: governing agricultural profit rate 75, 498-9; transmitted by agricultural profit rate 439-40, 446-59, 460-1, 463-4 Germany 34 Gibbard, Keith 445 Gilbert, G. 84in, 863 gluts 532-9, 847; M. and R. differ on 81,

I N D E X 1035 126, 532-42; M.'s micro-economic rationale for 541—2; temporary phenomenon 612—14; Torrens's dismissal of M. on 7; and transfer problem 682, 698; see also excess supply Godwin, William 784, 928; communistic proposals 22-5, 26, 27, 37, 68; correspondence, see Malthus-Godwin in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; M. critical of 22-5, goSn, 934n, 939; and perfectibility of man 784, 884-5 gold: advantages as measure 631-5; deflationary effect of return to 623; disappearance from circulation 640, 649—52; M.'s case for 631-6; R.'s 'gold' measure of value 277, 284-5n, 289, 301, 302, 320-3, 331, 338-4O, 482-4; R.'s ingot scheme of economizing 631, 654-5; for settlement of international debt 632-3; value and cost of 245; see also bullion; convertibility; precious metals gold reserve: effect of purely paper currency 658-60; and foreign government expenditure 651-2; pressure of imprudent issues 688; required for return to convertibility 654—5 Gordon, B. 8o8n Gordon, H. Scott 8o8n Gossen, H.H. 22in government 874-5, 890-916; general rule of non-interference 890-2, 915-16; intervention as corrective for industrial bias 809-11, 812-14, 817, 823-4, 840-2; role in alleviating unemployment 615-16, 624-6, 830, 899, 901-3; role in education 895-6; role in poor relief 896-905; and savings rate 615-16, 915-16, 983, 1003; salaries as transfer payments 513—14; and trade policy 884 government bonds: analogy with profit-rate movements 471, 985; timing of dividend payments 658 government borrowing: effect on profit rate 591-2; see also national debt government expenditure 620—8; and postwar fall in aggregate demand 609; use of gold reserve for foreign expenditure 651-2 Grampp, W.D. 8o8n, goon Grenfell, Pascoe 658, 659n gross revenue 573-5 Grounds of an Opinion on the Policy of Restricting the Importation of Foreign Corn (M. 1815) 370, 379, 6oin, 6o6n, 825-32; and

Bullionism 655, 656, 990; and diminishing returns 740-1, 747, 752-4, 772, 810, 82in; on free trade 550-1, 810, 825-30, 833-4, 861; R. claims inconsistency 989 growth: arithmetic ratio for food 18-22, 50, 57, 59; 'canonical' classical growth model 5, 173, 766, 797, 872, 963, 979; constant money wage and 161; and diminishing returns 184-5, 198-9; geometric ratio for population 18-22, 49-50; 'immiserizing' 42n; M. adopts industry-based 8n-i2, 861-3; single-sector corn model of 162; technical change as part of 35?n; see also agricultural expansion; balanced growth; land-based growth theory; manufacturing expansion; population growth; sustainable growth Halevy, E. 9o8n 'happiness': as criterion in classical economics 917; of family life 934-5; Paley's 38n, 55, 912-13, 929n, 942-3; and population growth 34-5, 55, 893-4, 942-3; upheld by agricultural protection 830-1 Hartwick.J.M. i8n Harvey-Phillips, M.B. 92ln, 947 health: effect of improved 60-1, 199-200, 799; and population growth 198-200, 2O2-3, 206-7, 789-92, 798-9; and urbanization 199, 202-3, 800-1 Health and Morals of Apprentices Act (1802) 206 Heberden, William 79in Hicks, J.R. 219 Hilton, Boyd 8o8n, 8s6n, 864 Himmelfarb, G. 874-5 hoarding 510, 609-10, 625 Hodgson, Geoffrey M. 9 Holland 635-6 Hollander, Jacob H. 52n, 55n, 739, 748n, 758n,824n Hollander, S. 3, i6on, 246n, 257n, 375n, 4O5n, 4o6n, 4i8n, 42ln, 436n, 63in, 668n, 683n, 686n, 8o8n, 94in, 944n, 977n, 978, 997n Horner, Francis 6, ?65n, 83on, 949; accuses M. of inconsistency 991—2; and Bullionism 630, 63ln, 645n; correspondence, see Horner-Murray; Horner-Seymour; Malthus-Horner in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; M. writes to on free trade 824, 834, 845n, 858n, 86sn, 992; M.'s early statements on diminishing returns made to 72, 740, 747, 810, 820-2, 993

1036 I N D E X housing, and population growth 37n, 897-8 Hueckel, Glenn y66n Hume, David 623, 826; foreign trade 57On, 643n, 696, 698; M. quotes on theory 951, 962; paper money 652, 672-3, 973; population theory l8n, 28-9, 47-8 Huskisson, William: balance of trade 553n, 683, 696, 698; Bullionist controversy 634-6, 637-8, 645, 648n; free-trade reforms 809, 849, 857n, 858-gn,864,870-1 Hutchison, T.W. 9, 10 imports, corn: Britain becomes importer of corn 744-5, 750-2; corn-import restrictions 814-15; danger of dependency on 809-10, 815—17; unreliable nature of supply 818-20; see also agricultural protection; Corn Laws income: disposable 358; and output 90-1; per-capita 29, 48, 419, 793, 918-19 income distribution 893, 911-14 inconsistency, of M. 526n, 656, 76on, 939, 95O, 986-94; accused by Horner 991-2; accused by Torrens 6-7, 656, 939, 990-1; defence on Bullionism by R. 656-7, 991-2; on protectionism 989, 992-4; on surplus and scarcity 371-2, 380, 394-403, 95«, 989 increasing returns: Kames's theory of population growth 53-4; and new technology in agriculture i86n, 193-4, 465-7, 753-8, 766-7, 782, 847 indexation 643 India 713,719-20, 730 indolence, or luxuries 536—7, 577, 578—80, 583-4 inductive method 7, 949, 951, 957, 958, 977 industrial bias: agricultural protection to balance 809-11, 812-14, 817, 823-4, 840-2, 859; and doctrine of proportions 840-1; see also manufacturing sector industrialization: and availability of American corn 836-7; and Britain changes from exporter to importer of com 763, 798 industry-based growth, acceptance by M. 811-12,861-3 inflation: effect of non-convertible paper currency 636; and labour demand 592—3; long-term depressive effects 672-4; and redistribution of property 667-8, 674-5, 826-8; see also deflation inoculation 60-1, 875-6 Inquiry into Rent, (M.; 1815) 15,95-113, 115,

240, 257, 260; diminishing returns 96-103, 394, 741, 754-8; effect of exogenous increase in corn price 108-10; free trade 831, 833; physiocratic links 4O4n, 407; on real costs of use of marginal land 103-7; R.'s response to 110-12; separation of rent from profits 95, 96-103; surplus vs scarcity 369, 374n, 377; theory of international prices 679, 711-12, 713-14, 735 intellectual honesty, M.'s 866-7, 950-1, 1002 intensity of demand 227-38; as demand price 234-6; and extent of demand 218, 227-32, 23in, 233-4; and labour sacrifice 22?n; and money sacrifice 227 interest rates: in disequilibrium conditions 164-5; downward trend 7?6n; effect of increased money supply 668; and national debt 744 international competitiveness, and corn price 815-16, 822-3 international monetary economics: international price theory 711-35; transfer problem 677-711 international monetary equilibrium: effect of new mine or new bank 683, 694; and export efficiency 860; value of precious metals:— M. and R. assume uniformity of 632-5, 677-9, 682-4, 693; — M. and R. later agree on non-uniformity 711—21, 734-5 international trade: based on gold 632-3, 646; universal acceptability of bullion 632-5, 682-3; see also comparative cost doctrine intrinsic value 634—5, 647 Inverarity report 410, 41 in inverse wage profit ratio: J.S.Mill on 3O7n, 462n; M.'s 476-92, 501; and M.'s labourcommanded measure of value 336; R.'s 155, 158-60, 167-71, 251-4, 470-6, 479-83; — M.'s assessment as truism 158, 473, 488; see also profit rate; secular profitrate decline; secular wage path; wageprofit relationship Investigation of the Cause of the Present High Price of Provisions (M.; 1800) 8, 225-6, 23on, 6o5n,743~4 investment: equality or inequality with savings 5O7n, 609—10; excessive realized 586; wartime 586 Ireland 580-3, 753; M. on stagnation in 579-80, 581, 582-3

I N D E X 1037 Jacob, William 8580 James, Patricia 8o8n, 886n, 93311, 992 Jevons, W.S. 14, 217, 219, 98511 Jones, Richard 7, 475-6, 953-4, 996, 1001 Kames, Lord Henry 53—4 Kates, S. 1006-8 Keynes, J.M. 7-10, 638; on correspondence between M. and R. 5, 519; linkages with M. 628-9, 676, 1004-5, 1006-8; — in call for public works to absorb unemployment 624-5; — m focus on aggregate demand 585, 609-10, 629, 1004-5, 1006-8 King, Lord 134, &3in, 636, 641, 645n Klein, Lawrence R. 1006-7 labour, 'productive'/'unproductive' 507, 508-14, 565 labour-commanded index of value: constant 448, 723-7; and extended trade 555-7; J-S. Mill on M.'s 333-6; and labour embodied 308-12, 347; M. defends R. against Bailey on 340-3; as measure of costs 293-317, 341-4, 345, 349, 495~7, 500-1; M.'s 248-9, 278-83, 293, 295-333, 344-9, 486, 495-7, 500-1; — as cost theory ofvalue 295-6, 306-17, 341-4, 349; Smith's 248-9, 272, 280, 295-6, 301-2, 321, 340-1, 663-4; and wages 313, 315-17 labour demand 419-29; almost constant 61; by manufacturing sector 66, 424; and changes in capital 421-3, 434; in depression 598-600; and doctrine of proportions 423-5, 427-9; and inflation 592-3; and living standards 188-9, 428-9, 831; for manufacturing or agriculture 39-42, 203; and money wage 109-10, 419-21, 756n; and new technology 421—2, 425—7, 574-5, 742; and oscillatory process 63; and population growth 66, 185-9, 203-4, 413, 419-21; related to value of national product 419-25, 429; relative to capital demand 151-3, 156-7, 166; and service sector 422-5; Smith's analysis criticized by M. 39-40, 185-6, 209; and wage fund 424-5, 427, 430, 433 labour-embodied index of value 248-9; 308-12, 347; R-'s 248-9, 273-4, 277, 283-9, 298-9, 476-7; R.'s money measure of 276-7, 284-5n,289, 302-3, 320-3, 331, 338-40, 482-4; — criticism of by M. 283-5, 323, 331, 479-82, 498 labour participation rate, and family earnings 429, 778-80

labour productivity 140-1, 145, 148 labour sacrifice 22?n, 4l4n labour supply 412-19; and living standards 417-19; postwar growth of 607-8, 624; and production costs 3o6n, 413; see also supply conditions labour theory of value: M.'s dated quantities of labour 273-4, 307-12, 459-60, 500; in Principles 248—54; rent complexity 255-63; R.'s exchanges with M. on 248-61, 282-3, 321-22; time complexity 249-51; see also labour-commanded index of value; labour-embodied index of value; value; value measurement labouring classes 41—2, 62, 356—7, 367 Laidler, D. 676 land: distribution of 508, 562-3, 574-5, 590-1; and 'reservoir' analogy 49-50; varying costs of 103-4; see also land-based growth theory; land fertility; land improvement; land scarcity land-based growth theory 27-33, 45~56, 96-9, 182-213, 766; in corn terms 96100, 113; and diminishing returns 27-33, 48-9, 53; in Essay 2?-33, 47~56, 182-213; in Inquiry into Rent 96-9; and oscillatory process 45—7, 213; reconciliation of theory and observed fact 774-81, 957; see also growth; land scarcity land fertility: and capital 86-7, 98, 140-1, 143-4; and excess supply of food 241; M. rejects as stimulus to growth 575-9; and profits and wages 86-7, 599-6oon; and rent ni-12, 144, 377~8, 384-0, 39O-1; see also land improvement land improvement 17, 23, 41—2; and agricultural productivity 55-6, 753-4, 757-8, 766-7, 778-9, 781; and capital redundancy 744; and capital scarcity 24, 56, 193; effect of taxation 373-4, 756; and 'high farming' 752, 828; and new technology i86n, 193-4, 752-4; social return 842-5, 846; see also land fertility landowning class: inadequate consumption by 564-6; landlords criticized by M. 855-6, 865, 866, 908-9; vital to national prosperity 370-1 Landry, A. 4O5n land scarcity: and diminishing returns 27-33, 47-56, 97-8, 742-4; and high price of food 386-7; indirect effect on manufacturing 82-3, 93, 96; labour-saving technology as response to 568; perspective on rent 96-9, 103-7, 360-1,

1038 I N D E X 373-6, 380-91, 395, 397; and population growth 37-9, 174, 176, 182-90; and real wage 5> 34, 7°, 71-2, 86, 97-8; see also diminishing returns; land-based growth theory; 'monopoly'; profit rate Langer, G.F. 8o8n Latin America 579 Lauderdale, James Maitland, Earl of 824n; on demand 233, 235; on saving 514-15; theory of value 218, 237 Law, John 648 Law of Markets 70, 92, 94; and aggregate demand and supply 540-1; application only to food by M. 71, 92, 1OO, 104, igSn, I4in, 240; and competition of capitals 144-5, 146-7, 483; M. and R. differ on 80-1, I49n,161-2, 167, 483-5, 532-42; and manufactured goods 139; Mill's 80-2, 84, 167, 436, 533, 540, 541-2; M.'s objections to 78, 147-8, 161-2, 492-7, 533-5, 539-6o; R.'s support for gin, 126, 167; see also demand-supply; Say's Law legal tender, Bank of England: depreciated paper currency as 641-2, 653-4 leisure, demand for 536-7, 577, 578-80, 583-4, 968 Letter to Samuel Whitbread (M.; 1807) 798n, 878 Levy, D. 874, 88m, 882, 886-7 life: as formation of character for next world 921, 923-4, 926n, 930; as trial 922, 923, 926, 947 living standards: and changes in tastes 191—3, 203, 905; and labour demand 188-9, 428-9, 831; and labour supply 417-19, 445-6; and moral restraint 933—5; of poor 185—90; and prudential control 187-90, 191-3, 203, 432-3- 792, 803, 874, 882-5, 905 Lloyd, W.F. 221, gion Locke, John 345, 92in Longfield, Mountifort 221, 23On, 3O7n, 444n,971 Lowe, Joseph 850 luxuries: effect of increasing real wage on 189-90, 418-19; or indolence 536-7, 577, 578-9, 583-4; and labour demand 188-9, 428-9 McCulloch, J.R. 350, 572, 915; and comparative-cost theory 549n, 552; correspondence: see Ricardo-McCulloch in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; free trade 553, 850, 853n; identifies M. with Say 268-9;

M. compares with Physiocrats 965-6; relationship between wages and profits 254n, 487 machinery: impact on aggregate demand 570-3; impact on costs 568-9; M. and R. differ on 572, 583, 997-8, 1000; and sustainable growth 567-73, 969; see also technical change Mallet, John Lewis 549n Malthus, Thomas Robert: accused of inconsistency 526n,656, 76on,939, 950, 986-94; — by Horner 991-2; — by R. 989:— by Torrens 6-7, 656, 939, 99O-1; 'agricultural bias' 363-72, 391-3, 405-11, 832-4, 849, 863; conservatism 631, 676, 1003; dissatisfaction with Principles 5, 987-9; intellectual honesty 866-7, 950-1, 1OO2; love of paradox and provocation 2O-2, 950, 962; not a 'dismal scientist' 189-90, 914; not a subjective-value theorist 219, 233, 272; optimism on population growth 795, 800-1, 804, 879-81, 914-15; optimism on productivity trends 741, 745, 76i-5, 766-8, 772-3, 783, 864-5; personal relationship with R. 5-6, 866-7, 1001—2; as precursor to neoclassical economics 218; reformism of 874-5, 920, 948; theological utilitarianism 917-48; unease on social effects of protectionism 807-9, 840, 842-5, 846, 850-1 Mandeville, Bernard 529n, 539n; The Fable of the Bees 929 manufactured goods: demand 76-7, 83, 139> 141, I49n, 155, 164; elasticity of supply 26; stimulating or stimulated by agricultural expansion 114, 116-21, 122-5, 364-5; value of 360-1 manufacturing. See manufactured goods; manufacturing expansion; manufacturing prices; manufacturing profit rate; manufacturing sector manufacturing expansion: effect on corn price 238; and population growth 39-42, 203—12; and pressure on prices 8ll; and saving 39-40 manufacturing prices, and bullion flows 679-80, 693, 696-8, 700, 708-9 manufacturing profit rate 90, 92, 93, 103, 112, 464-8; and new land 71; and profitrate decline 464-8; relationship with agricultural profit rate 87-8, 118, 124-7, 128-31, 446-59, 778 manufacturing sector: and balanced growth 809, 810-11, 812-14, 817, 867;

I N D E X 1039 capital accumulation 66, 96, 128-9, 1 47» 154; and constant cost industry 103; dependent on agricultural surplus 359-6o, 363-4, 365, 835; effect of prosperity in 70, 87-8, 109, no; excess demand 76—7, 83; growth of, no benefit to labour 41-2, 62, 356-7, 367; importance of exports 860-3; income as transfer payment 353~4, 358-6o, 365-7, 407; and industrial bias 809-11, 812-14, 817, 823-4, 840-2, 859; labour demand by 66, 424; as lead sector 92, 112, 124, 128, 133-4, 162-3; movement of capital from land 87-8, 132, 744; possibility of surplus in 357-8; 'productiveness' of 355-6, 358, 36on, 364~5n; see also corn manufacturing price ratios; sectoral relationships Marcet.Jane. See Malthus-Marcet in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE margin: diminishing returns 48-9, 97-8; intensive or extensive 97-8; and rent 103-7, 401-2, 439 marginal costs: corn and cattle 256—61; and corn surplus 118-19, 12O-1; and rent 103-7 marriage: and absolute population size 28-9, 47-8, 199-200; as biblical remedy for fornication 881; and birth/death ratio 6o-l, 795-6, 801; contraception within 8gon, 945, 948; delay or diminution of 788-9, 790-2, 882-5, 886-90; early 19, 29, 47-8, 199-200, 933; Godwin's proposed abolition of 22; housing shortage as check to 37n, 897-8; and mortality rates 191, 789-92, 795-6, 800-1; poor relief as stimulus to early 26, 862, 900; and population growth i8n, 19, 798; see also moral restraint; prudential control Marshall, Alfred 9, 218, 638; and M.'s arithmetic/geometric ratios 14—15, 16 Marx, Karl 3O5n, 564n, 8i2n, 872, 875, 882, 910 mathematics: as appropriate procedure for doctrine of proportions 950, 984-6; contrasted with economics 950, 955-6, 984, 986 The Measure of Value (M.; 1823) 22On, 297n, 299, 300-6, 321-44; changes in value of bullion 661, 665, 666n; criticism of landlords 855-6, 866; endogeneity of finance 56on, 561; J.S. Mill on 333-6, 341, 349; M.-R. exchanges on 321-33; M.'s answers to Bailey's criticisms 336-44; objections to Law of Markets 492-7, 501;

and proportionality theorem 487-92; restatement of Smith's labour-commanded measure 663-4; role of money in postwar depression 6o7n; 'Table illustrating the invariable Value of Labour and its Results' 317, 323-2, 340-1, 343, 352, 489-92, 962; theory of international prices 711-12, 7i7n, 727-8, 735 medium of exchange, precious metals as 225, 227,634-0, 692-3, 694 methodology: M.'s and R.'s differences 7-10, 160, 960-1, 965-7; M.'s and R.'s similarities 950, 978; R. misrepresented by M. 5-6, 951, 994-7; R.'s interest in long-run analysis 217-18, 247-8, 998-9; Smith's 969-75, 998-9 methodology, Malthusian 5—10, 949—1003; distinctive 960-1, 997-1000, 1002-3; in Essay 9-10, 196-7, 961-2; inductivist 7, 949, 951, 957, 977; lack of full-fledged system 5, 7, 10, 950, 956; long-run equilibrium analysis 949; love of paradox and provocation 6, 950; model building 958-61, 967-8, 979; positive case for deductive theory 949-50, 951-65; shortrun 217-18, 247-8, 998-9; simplification and complexity 958-60, 977-8; theory verification and prediction 950, 975-9 middle class 562, 583, 590-1, 619 Mill, James 44, 235, 240n, 926n; admired Smith's methodology 970-1; correspondence: see Ricardo-James Mill in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; Law of Markets 80-2, 84, 167, 436, 533, 540, 541-2; price theory 263, 302; as utilitarian 917; M. compares with Physiocrats 965—6 Mill, John Stuart 13, 14, 217, 944; agricultural protection/free trade 824n, 850, 853n, 857n, 858n; defence of Paley 927n, 938n; on inverse wage-profit relation 3O7n, 462n; reformist orientation 905, 920; review of M.'s The Measure of Value. 333-6, 341, 349, 495~7, 501; 'The Influence of Consumption on Production' 629; utilitarianism of 917-18, 941, 948 Mirabeau, V.R. Marquis de 64, 404, 405 'misery' ign, 36-7, 196-8; moral degradation of 887-90; M.'s changing concepts of 937-8; and vice 36, 919-20, 925, 937-8 mixed agricultural-commercial system 179-85, 796-8, 810-11; population growth 179-85, 796-8; qualified diminishing returns 182-4, 810-11 model building, M.'s 958-61, 967-9, 979

1040 I N D E X monetary contraction: depression as effect of 666; not cause of postwar depression 675-6 monetary expansion 666-72, 674-6, 687-8; in convertible system 670-1; effect on output 670-2; and fall in purchasing power 668-70, 672; and forced saving 668—9; m inconvertible system 666—70; leading to speculative ventures 669; not recommended for postwar depression 674-6; temporary nature of stimulus 672, 675—6; and unfavourable exchange rates 687-8 monetary policy 666-76, 1003 monetary systems: advantages of gold 631-6; convertibility 632 money: cost of I5ln; effect of postwar monetary contraction 606—7; importance as circulating medium 601—4; intrinsic value 634—5, 647; M. insists mixed metal and paper 657; R. recommends purely paper 656-60; velocity of circulation of 558-9, 560-2, 694; see also bullion; gold; paper currency; precious metals; specie; velocity of circulation money measure 159, 337; M.'s money measure 482, 556-9; R.'s 'gold' measure 276-7, 284-5n,301,320-3, 331; — criticized by M. 283-5, 323, 33L 479-82, 498; — utilized by M. 289, 302-3, 338-40, 482—4; seashore 'silver' as M.'s ideal i67n, 169-70, 254, 283, 302, 322-3, 963; see also value measurement; value theory money value. See value of money money wage: and agricultural extensions I5in; and agricultural productivity I53n; and commodity wage 150-1, I53n; and corn price 137, 142-3, 238-40, 413-16; determination 414; effect on prices 238; and labour-commanded index of value 313, 315-17; and labour demand 419-21, 756n; postwar decline 4i4n; and production costs I56n; and profit rate 74-5, 76-7n, 93, 150; and real wage I56n, 161; and rent 137; and secular decline in corn wage 150-1; sticky 208, 211 money-wage flexibility 542, 586, 603-5, 613-14 'monopoly,' and rent 256n, 259-60, 360-1, 373-6, 395, 397 moral restraint: based on self-interest 939; as check to population growth 36, 196-8, 202-3, 874, 886-90, 930-2, 939-40; desirability of 888-90, 929-30, 939-40; and liv-

ing standards 933-5; M. defines term 936-7; in M.'s utilitarianism 933-6; see also prudential control morality: as calculation of consequences 926-8; moral improvement 921-5; private vices, public benefits 929; of sensual pleasures 928; utility as M.'s foundation of 932-6 mortality rates 198, 199-200, 786-7; and birth/death ratios 59-61, 795-6, 800-1, 978-9; and diminution of marriage 191, 789-92; and education 895-6; high wages and low 875-8, 905; and population growth 789-92, 794, 798-9, 875-8, 978-9; and urbanization 202-3, 207 Murray, John, corresondence. S^Horner— Murray; Malthus-Murray in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE Mushet, Robert 636-7, 649n Myint, H. 9, 217-18, 23in Nakaya, Toshihiro 49ln Napier, Macvey 407-8, 41 in, 8o7n; correspondence: see Malthus-Napier in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE national capital, wartime reduction 598, 614, 617 national debt 586, 619, 620-4; and aggregate demand 982—3; and agricultural protection 826-8, 839, 968; dangers of sudden reduction in 619, 620—3, 839, 1003; and interest rates 744; and stagnation 611; see also government borrowing national income (product) 573—5; and demand for labour 185; effect of saving and capital accumulation 510-11; effective demand and 524-6; increased by extended trade 507, 542-7, 552-8, 618-19; labour-commanded index of 507, 523-6, 542-7, 587; money measure value °f 556—9, 587; population growth as stimulus to 526-8; and size of workforce 574-5, 996-7; Smith's definition 40, 357, 358-9, 36on,408, 971 national wealth: exports no indication of 355n> 371, 809, 834; and international price differentials 712-13, 717-18 natural price: of labour 416-17; rejected by Say 265; Smithian 218, 225, 244-7, 262, 302, 314, 399 natural value 317—21 Negishi, T. 49?n, 5O7n, 1004 neoclassical economics, M. as precursor 218 net revenue 573-5

I N D E X 1041 new colonies 17, 54; population growth 29-31, 37-8; see also United States New Holland (Australia) 57-8 new land 71, 97; effect on profit rate 71, gin,93,130-3, 138-9, 181 new markets, and profit rates 71, 72-3, 138-9, 181 Newenham, Thomas 6, 366n Norway 198, 2OO-1, 789, 889 O'Brien, D.P. 234n, 272n, 350, 8o8n, 917 Observations on Certain Verbal Disputes (Anon.) 22in, 23in Observations on the Effects of the Corn Laws (M.; 1814): agricultural protection 239, 550, 810, 822-4, 828, 831, 834; and Bullionism 655; demand-supply pricing 226n; diminishing returns 740, 747-50, 76gn, 810; and rent 355, 374~5> 396n, 407 Oddy, Joshua Jepson 75on Ohlin, B. 551 On Definitions in Political Economy, Mai thus equilibrium in commodity and labour markets 234n; foreign trade 552-3, 556; on physiocratic theory 41 in; prices and demand-supply 236n, 962; utility 22on; on value 291, 294n, 336, 344 'old countries' oscillatory process 44, 63; population growth 38; populousness 28-9; slow growth of food supply 53; see also Britain; Europe O'Leary, James J. 1006-7 oscillatory process 42-7, 63-6, 209—12, 213, 977 Otter, William 809, 846 Owen, Robert 572-3, 897, 910, 92On Paglin, Morton I. 218, 233, 235 Paine, Thomas 896 Paley, William 52gn, 539n, 564n; concept of life as trial 922, 923, 926n, 947; 'happiness' 38n, 55, 912-13, 929n, 942-3; influence on M. i8n, 4O3n, 913-14, 925-6, 932-4; J.S. Mill defends 92?n, 938n; theology 92in, 927-8, 933~4 paper currency 632-66; acceptability of 632-3 convertibility/inconvertibilty 635-6, 638, 646-7; depreciated 636-44, 653, 673-4, 954; effect of war on 607, 661-6, 826-7; and extended trade 558-9; gold driven out by 649-52; as legal tender 641-2, 653-4; recommended by R. 656-60; value and cost of 245; see also convertibility

Patinkin, D. 1004 per-capita income: and employment 419; as M.'s primary concern 918-19; and new technology 55-6; and population density 27-8, 29-32, 47, 54-7, 793; and population growth 29, 48, 793 Petersen, W. 8o8n Physiocracy diminishing returns and physiocratic surplus 371-2, 380, 394-403, 950, 989; finally abandoned by M. 5, 407-11, 989; food-population link 403-4, 406-7; M. praised by Physiocrats 356, 403—4, 406-7; and M.'s 'agricultural bias' 363-72, 391-3- 405-n, 811, 832-4, 866; M.'s awareness of 353, 356; M.'s debt to 403-6; M.'s linkages with 4-5, 353-411; and Ricardians 965-6; R.'s objections to 379-82, 833; Single Tax objections by M. 353, 354, 36i-2, 366, 376, 407; Smith's views associated with 364-5^ 370-1, 403, 408; surplus solely from agriculture 356, 358-60, 363-5, 366-9, 370-2, 407, 950; 'unproductive' nature of trade 546; view of rent 358, 361-2, 365-6, 374-6, 378-9; see also corn surplus; rent; surplus Place, F. 945 Poland 179-80, 713 Poor Laws and poor relief: abolition proposals by M. 896-9; effect on wages 593, 896-7; no right to subsistence 58, 896; and population growth 25-6, 36-7, 743-4, 788, 798n, 896-7; role of government 896-905; as stimulus to early marriage 26, 201, 862, 900 population, absolute size 28—30, 47—8 Population Act, census returns 59, 788-9, 790, 795-6, 799-8oo, 946 population density 27-8, 29-32, 47, 54-7, 793 population growth 13—94, 173-213, 784-804; accelerating 17, 49, 61-2, 197, 785-6, 788-9, 799-802; in 'agricultural,' 'commercial,' or mixed systems 174-85; and agriculture/manufacturing split 39-42; and capital accumulation 535-6, 538-9, 797-8, 800-1; decelerating 1849O, 197, 795-6, 800-1; desirability of 943-4; and diminishing returns 55-6, 184-5, 198-9, 795-6; and economic expansion 801-2; excessive 97-8, 786, 787, 930; and export of corn 53-4; and falling profit rate 525-6, 528-9; and food production 18-66, 197-201, 207-12, 743-4, 787-8, 879-1; — M.'s order of

1042 I N D E X precedence 42-3, 64-6, 207-12, 247, 382, 387—9; — R.'s order of precedence 66, 207-8, 2io, 212, 219, 247; forced 33, 34, 42, 44, 794; geometric ratio 13-22, 49-5°; and 'happiness' 34-5, 55, 893-4, 942-3; and health 198-200, 202-3, 206-7, 789-92, 798-9; and Kames's theory of increasing returns 53-4; and labour demand 66, 185-9, 203-4, 413, 419-21, 920; and land scarcity 37-9, 174, 176, 182-90; and manufacturing expansion 39-42, 203-12; maximization of 20, 794—5; and moral restraint 36, 196—8, 2O2-3, 874, 886-90, 930-2, 939-40; M.'s optimism 795, 800-1, 804, 879-81, 914—15; in new colonies 29-31, 37—8; and new technology 178-9, 181, 204, 792-3, 797-8; oscillatory process 42—5, 63, 209-12, 977; and per-capita income 29, 48, 793; and Poor Laws 25-6, 36-7, 743-4, 788, 878, 896-7; positive and preventive checks on i8n, ign, 36-7, 196-8, 788-92; postwar 199, 203-4, 607-8; religious case for 881, 907-8, 922-3, 944; and saving 176, 177, 185; slow 17, 35-9, 176, 787-9, 794, 944; as stimulus to national income 526—8; unchecked 17—25, 34, 37-8; and urbanization 198—9, 200—1, 204—5, 799—800; and wages, — corn 62, 168-9, 801; — downward wage path 27-8, 33-5, 43-7, 168-9, 607-8, 799; — and family earnings 208-9, 429-33; — prudential wage path 187-90, 201-3, 786, 791-2, 803, 879-80; — rising or high 796, 873, 875-80, 943-4, 946; wartime 595, 607-8, 791, 797-8; see also birth rates; mortality rates; Population Act; prudential control; stationariness of population population theory: M.'s critique of Godwin's 22-5, 26, 27; M.'s critique of Price's 35, 49, 6?n; Paley as origin of M.'s i8n; Weyland's critique of M.'s 195-203, 207, 799, 978-9; see also Essay on Population postwar depression 595-615, 674-6, 859-60, 976-7; contrasted with wartime expansion 610-12; and free trade 810, 825n, 833; government role in mitigation 615-16; and inconvertible note issues 636, 672-4; monetary contraction not responsible 675-6; monetary expansion not recommended 674-6; and moneywage flexibility 586, 603-5, 613-14; recovery from 586, 614-23, 674-6, 859-50; and unemployment 600-1, 603-9, 859-60

poverty ign, 36-7, 196-8; or prudence 874, 881-5, 886-90; and social unrest 893-4 precedence, food and population growth: M.'s 42-3, 64-6, 83, 207-12, 247, 382, 387-9; R.'s 66, 207-8, 210, 212, 219, 247 precious metals: cost of obtaining 733-4; as measure of value 275, 694; as medium of exchange 225, 227, 634-5, 692-3, 694; price differentials caused by variations in value 714-18, 957; relationship between national wealth and value of 712-13, 717-18; specie distribution 547-8, 551; uniformity or non-uniformity of value internationally 632-5, 677-9, 682-4, 693, 711-21, 734-5; as universal equivalent 634—5; universally acceptable 632—5, 682-3; value measured in corn prices 106-7; variations in value of 727-31; see also bullion; convertibility; gold; silver prediction, verification of 950, 975-9 Prendergast, Renee 395n, 461—3 Price, Richard i8n, 32, 35, 48-9, 67n price determination: and diminishing returns 394-403; food as special case 240-2, 243—4, 377-9, 399; monopolistic commodities 237, 243; M'.s demand—supply approach 226n, 227-34, 237-8, 273, 962; production-cost approach 224-5, 229n, 242-8, 266-8, 273 price level 642-3, 644n prices: and agricultural protection 244—5, 732, 747-52, 820-3, 825-30; changes in equilibrium 229-31, 233-4; corn-manufacturing price ratios 121—2, 124—5, 126-31, 396-9, 759-60; effect of bullion flows 679-80, 693, 696-8, 700, 708-9; effect of new land 131—4; fluctuations under free trade 828-30; food 40, 41; governed by corn price 8l, 126, 133, I49n, 239-40, 974; impact of war on 560-2; of manufactured goods 464-8, 679-80, 693, 696-8, 700, 708-9; market 225; Smithian natural 218, 225, 244-7, 262, 302, 314, 399; stability under free trade 828-30, 831-2, 838-9, 858-9; theory of international 711-12, 714-32; and wages 40, 142-3, I49n, 234, 238-40; see also corn price price theory 217-71; capital 261, 493n, 494n; common ground between M. and; R. 222-3, 263; international 711-12, 714-31; M.-R. correspondence on 247-8, 268-9; Say on M.'s 263-71; see also value theory

I N D E X 1043 Priestley, Joseph 953, 95911 primogeniture, law of 590-1, 619, 906 Principles of Political Economy, (M.): agricultural protection 811, 842-56, 864-5, 867; diminishing returns 394, 399-403, 769-803; foreign trade 542-58; government expenditure and finance 623-8; on gross and net revenue 573-5, 996-7; international price theory 711-12, 714-31; labour demand and supply 412-29; money and monetary policy 660-1, 674-6; new technology 567-73; postwar depression 595-615; price theory 38, 220-71; productivity estimates 769-83; profit-rate analysis 437-59, 460-86; rent 219, 254-63. 372-9,383, 387-9, 392; role of government 615-23, 890-2; secular stagnation 575-83; surplus vs scarcity 369—79; sustainable growth 5°5-29, 542-7, 562-3, 567-73;value measurement 274, 275-300, 301-2, 339; wartime expansion 586-95 Principles of Political Economy and Taxation (R.): 163-7, 380-1, 384; correspondence 163-7; M.'s reactions to 163-7, 949-5°, 995 private charity 898-9, 911, 933n private property, and marriage 881-2, 893-4,910-11 production costs: in M.'s price theory 242-8; profits as item of 142, 249-50; in R.'s price theory 224-5, 229n, 242-3, 267-8, 273, 276-7; Say on 265, 266-7; and supply 247, 273, 996; and technical change 266-8; see also comparative cost; supply conditions production function 24, 25-6, 743 'productiveness': as classification of labour 507, 508-14, 565, 982; of manufacturing 355-6, 356n, 358, 36on, 364-5^ physiocratic definition 359, 410; of services 270-1, 346, 394 profit rate: and aggregate demand 79-81, 84-5, 146-7, 149, 152-5, 472n, 495, 758; and aggregate output 85, 147-8; and agricultural expansion 75-6, 97-100, ll6-27, 129-30; and agricultural productivity 5, 70-90, 96, 97-9, 101-2, 130-4, 136-56, 145-7, 161-2, 599-6oo, 757-61, 773-81; — indirect effect conceded by M. 70-1, 82-^0, 98-9, 130, 133-4, 153-5, 471-2, 498, 500; — productivity as 'limiting' principle 70, 164, 437-8, 441-4, 448-51; — R.'s direct effect denied by M.

70, 72-82, 161-2, 966-7; — R.'s direct effect finally admitted by M. 213, 498; — secular decline 5, 71-2, 86-9, 94-8, 1304, 145-7, 157, 172, 437; and agricultural protection 74-7, 135-6, 156, 171-2, 780-1, 842-6, 865; agricultural-manufacturing rate relationship 87-8, 118, 124-7, 128-31,446-59; analogy with movements in long-term bonds 471, 985; analysis in Principles 437-59, 460-86; and capital accumulation 73-82, 90-1, 98-9, 102, 128, 138-8, 147, 154, 452-3- 494-500, 774-81; and competition of capitals 72, 130, 133, 166, 451-3, 780-1, 963; and Corn Laws 74n, 129, 163; and corn price 88-9, 92-3, 116-19, 142; and corn wages 437-8, 448,463; countervailing pressures 451-3; effect of government borrowing 591-2; effect of new land and markets 72-3, 9m, 93- 130-3, 138-9, 181; and excess supply 597; excessive response to high 529-32, 584; expressed in physical terms 440, 447, 450-1, 457-8, 461; expressed in value terms 454-7, 459-62; general-agricultural rate relationship 75, 439-40,446-59,46o-i, 463-4, 498-9;and increasing trade 83-4, 85, 586-7; and labour-supply conditions 306-12; and M.'s dated quantities of labour 310-11, 459-60, 461, 500; M.'s theory seen as Sraffian 435~6, 447, 456, 459~6o, 461, 963; material rate 73n, 78n, 83n, 459; and new technology 72, 194, 773-4; one-sector model 459-61; and oscillatory process 44-7, 63; and population growth 525—6, 528-9; regulating principle of profit:— corn wage as 437-8, 448, 463; — real wage as 468-72; and rent ill, 391-3; R.'s theory of, 99, 162, 168-9, 453, 995; and sustainable growth 525-6, 529, 584; temporary deviations 85n, 88, 94, 162; and wages 70-6, 86-7, 93, 151, 155, 251-3; — downward wage path 71-2, 98-9, 156-8, 437-68, 963; — insulated by declining wage, M. insists 70-6, 87, 95, 97, 151, 157-8; — wage fluctuations 438, 468-76; in wartime and postwar 661-2, 756-9, 775-8l; see also agricultural profit rate; corn-profit model; diminishing returns; inverse wage profit ratio; manufacturing profit rate; profits; secular profit-rate decline profits: M. defines surplus to include 369-70; and measures of value 300, 302,

1044 I N D E X 319-21, 324-6. 328-32, 345-6, 349-51; production costs as item of gin, 142, 249-50; separation from rent 95, 96-103, 125-6, 370, 953; see also corn-profit model; profit rate promiscuity 888-9, 937-8; and contraception 944-5; danger to women of 933, 935-6 proportionality theory: R.'s 155, 158-60, 167-71, 251-4, 470-6, 479-92; — finally accepted by M. 97-8, 442-3, 472-9, 486-8, 498 prostitution 928 prudential control: in 1817 Essay 187-8, 189-93, 2O1, 202-3, 802-3; and agricultural protection 848-9, 854; and education 895-6, 909-10; endogenous to growth process 176, 191, 203, 802-3, 962, 979; and improved living standards 187-90, 432-3, 792, 803, 874, 882-5, 905; and mortality rates 191, 789-92, 800-1, 876-8; or poverty 881-5; and private property 881-2; and slow population growth 36, 788-9; and utilitarianism 939-42; vice as result of 883-4, 886-90, 919-20, 928, 940-2; and wages 187-90, 201-3, 432-3, 529, 793, 872-3, 879-80; see also moral restraint public works 586, 624-6 Pullen, John M. 9, i6n, 8o8n, 846, 862n, 867n, 8?6n; M.'s theodicy 9i8n purchasing power: causes of changes in 289-90, 344; and conditions of supply 292-3; and convertibility 632, 636; and corn surplus 114; and increasing real wage 189—90, 418—19; measurement problems 642-4; M.'s search for index of 273, 275-83- 285-93, 344-5; and rise in money supply 668-70; and working-class consumption 527-8 Quarterly Review 867; M.'s review (1823) °f Tooke's High and Low Prices 533, 539-41, 559-62, 593-5, 613-14; — attacks methodology 960, 967; and Bullionism 642n, 644n, 661-6, 731; — and free trade 850, 86on; — international price theory 711-12, 731-2; 'Political Economy,' (M.; 1824) 268-9, 4°8, 41 m, 486-7, 493", 614-15, 966; — protectionism 848, 849, 859-61,866 Quesnay, F. 373n, 404-5,406-7,408, 595,971 Rae,John 969-70

Rashid,S. i8n,3gn,246n,549n,74in,8o8n; jaundiced view of M. ioo2n; M.'s theodicy gi8n,947 ratios, geometric and arithmetic 13-22, 31—2, 49-50, 57-60; as polemical device 21-2, 24-5, 57 Real Bills doctrine 647-9 real wage: and agricultural productivity 138; fluctuations 438, 468-76; and land scarcity 5, 34, 7°, 71-2, 86, 97-8; M. changes to corn wage 444-6; and money wage I56n, 161; and population growth 27—8, 3on, 33-5, 208-9; and profit rate 5, 70, 75-6, 86-7, 156-7, 251-3; see also downward wage path recovery, from postwar depression 586, 614-23, 674-6, 859-50; M.'s options for 615-23; and trade extension 614-15, 618-19, 859-60 redistribution of property 667—8, 674-5, 826-8 Reisman, David 953 remittances 634n, 677—710 rent 95-113, 255-63; and agricultural productivity 140-4, 147-8; causes affecting 102-4, 108—10; and corn price 108-10, 395-403; differential 103-7, 110-12, 256-61, 372, 740, 749-50; and foreign demand for corn 96, 108-10; Inquiry into Rent 95-113, 372; in labour theory of value 255-63; and land fertility 111—12, 144, 377-8, 384-5, 390-1; land-scarcity perspective 96-9, 103-7, ill, 256n, 259-60, 360-1, 373-6, 380-91, 395, 397; M. and R. differ on 110-12, 254-61, 262-3, 380-91, 953-4; marginal land 103-7, 401-2, 439; no-rent concept 257, 260-1, 262, 306-7, 311-12; — rejected by M. 170-1, 374-5, 989-90; physiocratic view of 358, 361-2,365-6, 374-6, 378-9; and price 100, 170-1, 255-61, 397-403; in Principles 254-63, 319, 372-9; Say on 171, 373, 382, 390; separation from profits 95, 96-103, 125-6, 370, 953; Smith on 255n, 372n, 373, 376; surplus perspective 358, 361-2, 365-6, 376-9, 394-403; as transfer payment loin, 354, 375-6; see also Physiocracy; surplus revenue, gross and net 573-5 'Ricardian vice' 6, 949, 95°, 969 Ricardo, David: and 'agricultural bias' of M. 379-82, 833; charged with holding back economics 8-9, 217, 1003; comparativecost doctrine 547-52; correspondence

I N D E X 1045 with M.: for reference to individual letters see INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; — for subjects of correspondence see correspondence, Malthus-Ricardo; correspondence with others, see RicardoBrown; Ricardo—James Mill; Ricardo— McCulloch; Ricardo-Say; RicardoTrower in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; diminishing returns 394, 396, 397-8, 4OOn; — surplus vs scarcity exchanges with M. 354-5. 378-gi, 392-3; Essay on Profits 114, 116-34, 379-80, 758n, 995; gluts and Law of Markets 8o-l, 126, I49n,161-2, 167, 483-5, 532-42; High Price of Bullion 63ln, 636-7, 653, 654-5, 668n, 66gn; — Appendix 677, 688-92, 694n, 697, 701, 709, 710; inconsistency charge against M. by R. 989; — defence by R. 656-7, 991-2; — inverse wage profit ratio 155, 158-60, 167-71, 251-4, 470-6, 479-83; labour and wages 416-17, 421-2; on machinery 572, 583, 997-8, looo; as main target in I*rinciples 949-50; on meaning of political economy 999-1000; methodology: — compared with M.'s 5-10, 160, 217-18, 247-8, 960-1, 965-7, 994-1002; — long-run approach 217-18, 247-8, 998; — misrepresented by M.'s 5-6, 951, 994-7; — similarities between M.'s and R.'s 950, 978; money and banking:— analysis of specie distribution 547-8, 551, 678-9; — Bullionism 547-8, 654-5, 656-60, 678-9, 692-708; — ingot scheme 631, 654-5; — proposal for purely paper currency 656-60; — Reply to Bosanquet 657-8, 683, 6g2n, &95n; — state commission proposed to replace Bank of England 656-7; on M.'s demand theory 221-3, 224-5, 236-8, 247-8; M.'s personal regard for 5-6, 866-7, 1001-2; 'New View' 136-56; population theory 66, 207-8, 210, 212, 219, 247; — order of precedence 66, 207-8, 210, 212, 219, 247; on postwar depression 586, 596, 604; praises M.'s candour 866-7, 1002; price theory 222-3, 263; — exchanges on M.'s 224-5, 244-5, 246-8,246n, 247-8,268-9; — productioncost approach 224-5, 229n, 242-3, 247-8, 267-8, 273, 276-8; Principles of Political Economy and Taxation 163-7, 380-1, 384; — M.'s reactions to 163—7, 949-50, 995; profit rate and agricultural productivity 99,125-7, 129-32, 162, 168-9, 453, 995;

— indirect effect conceded by M. 82-90, 98-9, 130, 133-4, 471-2; — initial denial of direct effect by M. 70, 72-82, 161-2, 966-7; — M. finally admits direct effect 213, 498; profit-rate theory: — M. claims neglect of variable wages 470-6, 488, 521, 995; — M's comments 443, 449, 460; — wage-profit relationship ll8n, 156-60, 470-6, 479-85, 486-8; proportionality theorem 155, 158-60, 167-71, 251-4, 470-6,480-92; — M. accepts 97-8,442-3, 472-9, 486-8, 498; rent 110-12, 254-61, 262-3, 380-91, 953-4; — response to Inquiry into Rent 110-12; Sraffa on 149n, 37On, 435, 436, 447; sustainable growth 628-9; theory of value:— acceptance of money measure by M. 289, 302-3, 338— 40,482-4; — confusion on value and cost 276-8; — criticism of money measure by M. 283-5, 323, 331, 479-82, 498; — criticism of M.'s corn measure 277, 288-9; — defended by M. against Bailey 337-40; — distinction between value and wealth 221, 265-6, 277, 292, 614; — exchanges on 248-61, 282-3, 321-22; — labour embodied 248-9, 273-4, 283-5, 298, 476-7; — M. and R. differ on measurement 282-3, 321-33, 552-8, 963; — measurement of value I5i-2n,337-42, 345-6, 349-51; — money measure 276-7, 284-sn, 301, 320-3, 331; — and M.'s exchange theory 224-5; — Say identifies M. and R. on 219, 221, 265-6, 962; — use of term 'value' 222-3, 348, 474, 475; trade: — analysis of export efficiency praised by M. 678-9; — corn-export bounty 238—9; — countervailing duty and drawback 851-4, 858-9, 86on; — exchange rates 677-92, 694, 711; — gains from trade 222-3, 548-9, 552-8; — motive for 690, 706-7; transfer problem 677-8, 679-85, 686-711; — bullion flows when money is cheapest export 677, 680-1, 688-92, 694, 698; — concessions to M. 699-701, 709-11; — and currency redundancy 678, 679-81,685-8, 694, 698; — and international price theory 720-1, 722; — replies to Thornton's Paper Credit 680-1; — uniformity of value of precious metals 632-5, 677-9, 682-4, 693, 711-21, 734-5; wartime expansion 587n, 591-2 riches. See wealth Robbins, L.C. 15, 16, 807, 8o8n, 872, 917; M.'s role in classical economics 1002-5;

1046 I N D E X M.'s theology extraneous to policy 918, 946 Rowthorn, B. See Costabile, L., and B. Rowthorn Royal Society of Literature: paper titled 'Conditions Necessary to the Supply of Commodities,' given by Malthus 306-12; paper titled 'Meaning of Value of a Commodity,' given by Malthus 292, 315-17 rural depopulation 204-6 Russia 713 Rutherford, R.P. 1004, 1007-8 Samuelson, P.A. 5, 24, 173, 219 saving: and checks to population growth 176, 177, 185; in depression 506, 597-8; determinants of 507, 529-41; equality or inequality with investment 5O7n, 586, 609-10, 629; excessive 510-11, 514-26, 537. 563-7, 597-8; and fall in consumption 514-26, 537, 597-8, 1003; forced 668-9; and hoarding 510, 609-10, 625; motive for 529-32; M.'s rejection of government control 615-16, 915-16, 983, 1003; patriotic motive 507-8, 615; and 'productive' labour 510-11; and sustainable growth 507, 514-26, 1000; and 'unproductive' consumption 563-7; see also capital accumulation Say, J.B. I49n, 354; correspondence: see Ricardo-Say in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; hoarding 610, 625; Letters to Malthus 263-71; M. and R. on value theory 219, 221, 265-6, 962; and M.'s price theory 217, 234n; 'productive' services 270-1, 346; profit theory 532-3; on rent 171, 373, 382, 390; value theory, M. critical of 268-70, 292-3, 298 Say's Law 70, 78, gin, 92, 167, 497; see also Law of Markets scarcity. See land scarcity; surplus Schumpeter, J.A. 217, 220-1; and M.'s population theory 13-14, 16, l8n,36, 69, 787, 878 Scotland 51, 111-12, 144, 793; excessive paper-money issue 973; poor diet 418 sectoral relationships 112, 154-5, 362-2, 394; agricultural manufactured good price ratios 121-2, 124-5, 126-31, 396-9, 759-60; agricultural-manufacturing profit rate 87-8, 118, 124-7, 128-31, 446-59; agriculture as lead sector 87, 90, 93, 114, 141, 367; agriculture-manufacturing distribution 39-42; interdepen-

dence 87-8, 93, 96, 363-5, 835-6; labourforce distribution 868; manufacturing as dependent on agricultural surplus 359-6o, 363-4, 818-19; manufacturing as lead sector 92, 112, 124, 128, 133-4, 162-3; need for balanced growth l8l-2, 767, 810-14, 823-4, 834-42; see also agricultural sector; manufacturing sector secular profit-rate decline 90-3, 94, 145, 146-7, 157, 437-46; and aggregate supply 91-2; and agricultural productivity 130-4, 145, 437; and declining corn prices 92-3; dictated by agricultural rate 90-3; and downward wage path 71-2, 98-9, 156-8, 437-68, 963; and land scarcity 5, 71-2, 86-9, 94-8, 145-7, 157; see also inverse wage/profit ratio; profit rate; wageprofit rate relationship secular wage path: corn wage n8n, 150-1, 438-9; and diminishing returns 441-4; in Essay 33-5, 47; M.'s case for insulation of profit rates by 70-6, 87, 95, 151, 157-8; M.'s statement of 437-46; and population growth 27-8, 33-5, 43-7, 607-8; and secular profit-rate decline 71-2, 98-9, 156-8, 437-68, 963; and wage fluctuations 88, 161, 414-17, 438, 468-76 security, of com supplies 809-10, 815-17, 818-19, 828-30, 833, 858-9 Sedgwick, Adam 927n, 938n Semmel, B. 403, 8o8n, 871 Senior, Nassau 69, I35n, 217, 7iln, 761; admits misreading of M.'s Essay 914-15, 92On, 994; and concept of utility 22on, 221; correspondence: see Malthus-Senior in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE; 'extrinsic' and 'intinsic' causes of value l99-2OOn; productivity 761, 767-8n services: consumption by persons in 565-7; distinguished from goods 268; labour demand 422-5; 'productive' or 'unproductive' nature of 270-1, 346, 394, 509, 5U-13 sexual passion: diminution of and increased earnings 885; effect of undisciplined 58; as law of nature 18-19, 197, 930-2; regulation of 934-6 Seymour, Lord Webb. See Horner—Seymour in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE

Short, Thomas 789 silver: gathered from seashore as M.'s ideal measure i67n, 169-70, 254, 283, 302, 322-3, 963; poor-quality coinage 650; preferred to gold as standard 659n

I N D E X 1047 Sinclair, John 753 Single Tax, M.'s objections to 353, 354, 361-2, 366, 407 Skourtos, M.S. 458n Smart, William 64in; Corn Laws 6oin, 6o4n,74On,820, 82Qn,858n Smith, Adam: 'agricultural bias' 379-80, 385; — corn price governing other prices 81, 126, HQn, 239-40, 974; — special treatment for corn 374~5n, 974; capital:— as loanable funds 667; — see also competition of capitals (Smithian); capital accumulation 96, 192, 453, 774-5; — saving 615-16, 980, 983; charged with 'Ricardian vice' 950, 969; corn-export bounty g2n, 7i2n, 751, 970, 973-4; — M. disagrees with 219, 745-6, 8i5n, 956; cost-price analysis 242-3, 244-6, 262; countervailing-tariffs proposal 823, 851, 853; demand theory 84, 225, 234-6, 238-40, 347; educational scheme 895; exchange rates 696, 698; government intervention rejected 812, 813, 842, 891, 973; growth without benefit to labour 62, 356-7, 367; labour demand 17, 39, 185-6, 209, 413; land scarcity 453; M. charges with irresponsibilty 950; methodology 969-75. 998-9; and money supply 667, 67in; national debt 623; national income 40, 357, 358-9, 36on, 403, 408, 971; 'natural' prices 218, 225, 244-7, 262, 302, 314, 399; physiocratic ideas 364-5^ 370-1, 403, 408, 452, 849; population theory l8n, 203, 207; 'productive' and 'unproductive' labour 507, 508-14, 565; productiveness of manufacturing 358, 36on, 364-5n; on rent 255n, 372n, 373, 376; and scarcity approach to corn pricing 397-8, 399; trade 177,355n, 722n, 809; — liberalization 6l8n; — and uniformity in value of precious metals 712—13, 972—3; value theory: — corn as measure 106—7, 286, 298-9; — criticism by M. 106-7, 286, 293, 294-5, 347-8; — labour-commanded 272, 280, 295-6, 301-2, 321, 340-1, 663-4; — and labour theory of value 248-9, 279, 33°, 557; — paradox of value 220; — restated in The Measure of Value 663-4; — used and modified by M. 248-9, 278-83, 293, 295-317, 344-9, 495-7; wages and wage determination 192, 414, 416, 4i6n, 417, 488; wealth: — and trade 355n, 809; — and value of precious metals 712-13, 717-18

Smith, V.E. 22in, 226n, 230, 23in, 232n, 235 social policy, role of government 874-5, 890-914 social reform 872-86; M.'s unease with effect of Corn Laws 807-9, 840, 842-5, 846, 850-1 social unrest, and poverty 893-4 Southey, Robert 867n, 88?n Spence, William 80, 406, 407, 862n SpenglerJ.J. 375n,9o8n Sraffa, Piero: corn-profit model 435, 445, 455-6, 477; M.'s profit theory interpreted as Sraffian 4, 435-6, 447, 456, 459-60, 461, 963; on Ricardo I49n, 3?on, 435, 436, 447; on Torrens I37n, 26in; value measurement 273 stabilization policies 586-628, 616, 963-4 stagnation, in development context 575-83 stagnation, postwar 506-7, 595-615; and aggregate demand 505-6, 580-3, 605-7, 609-10; despite low wages 598-600, 613—14; and fall in money prices 600; and national debt 611 stationariness of population 27-8, 96, 141, !75-9> 794, 799-2OO; in commercial economy 177, 178-9, 835; and constant corn wage 190, 962; as end-point of growth 107, 108; and new technology 178-9; premature 107-8; in 'thin' population 38-9, 54; undesirable 877, 944 Stephen, L. 927n, 936-7, 938 Steuart, Sir James 54, 64-6, 403, 6g6n sticky money wages 208, 211 Stigler, G.J. 15, 16, 221, 866n, 887n, gisn stocks, and flows 31 Storch, Heinrich Friedrich von 27on, 271 Sturges, R.P. Seede Marchi, N.B., and R.P. Sturges subsidies to foreign power, effect on balance of trade 680-1, 684, 698-707, 709-10 Sumner, John Bird 741, g22n, 926 supply: inelasticicity of land 111-12; interdependent with demand 104; regulated by cost of production 247; rent excluded 263; rent included 255-6; see also capital supply; excess supply; labour supply; land scarcity supply conditions: labour commanded as measurement of 293-306, 345, 495-6, 962; and labour market 312-17; and production costs 3o6n, 413, 996; and profit rate 306-12; temporary disturbances to

1048 I N D E X 314—15; value determined by 'intrinsic' 292—6; see also labour supply surplus: agriculture as sole source 353-4, 359-60. 365-79; in Essay 355-63; as excess of income over expenses 358; perspective on rent 376-9; physical or value 354, 376-9, 381-2, 387-9, 407; physiocratic identification with rent 358,361-2,365-6; profit included in M.'s definition 369-70; as Providential gift 97, 370, 382-3, 390-1; vs scarcity in M.'s physiocratic economics 369-79; see also corn surplus; Physiocracy Sussmilch, Johann Peter 5?8n sustainable growth 84, 90, 505-85, 963-4; and capital accumulation 91-2, 507, 514-26, 542-7, 617-18; and consumption 5°7. 514-26; and demand from 'unproductive' sector 563-7, 620-2; and distribution of property 562-3,981-2; effect of high profit rate 525-6, 529, 584; M. and R.'s differences on 628-9; M.-R. correspondence on 519-21; and new technology 567-73; private, not public, initiative 616; and trade 507, 542-7, 586-7; and working-class consumption 526-9 Sweden 198, 200-1 Switzerland 198, 200-1, 789, 889 Tahiti i4On, 143 tariffs: as corrective for resource allocation 810, 823—4; R.'s countervailing duty and drawback 851-4, 858-9, 86on; Smith's countervailing 823, 851, 853; see also agricultural protection taxation: to correct for distortions of 823-4, 841; dangers of sudden reduction 618—19, 620-8; effect on land improvement 373-4, 756; effects in war and peace contrasted 610-12; to finance public works 624-6; M.'s objections to Single Tax 353, 354, 361-2, 366, 376, 407 technical change 17, 89-90, 109-10, 357n, 567-75, 589; agricultural 41-2; and elasticity of demand 568-9; and expanded capacity 588-9; falling costs and increasing returns from i86n, 193-4, 266-8, 465-7, 753-8, 766-7, 782,847; and labour demand 421-2, 425-7, 574~5, 742, 997-8; in manufacturing 194; and population growth 178-9, 181, 204, 792-3, 797-8; and profit rate 72, 194, 773~4; and rising per-capita output 55—6; and sustainable growth 567-73; see also machinery terminology: differences in M.'s and R.'s

usage 236-7n, 246-7, 475, 693-700; R. charges M. with loose use of l68n, 986 Thompson, T. Perronet 398n Thornton, Henry: and Bullionism 63in, 636, 640, 644~5n; international transfer problem 68in, 684, 6g2n, 708; Paper Credit 636, 677, 679-81 time: diminishing returns surmountable in 55-6; labour theory of value 249-51; — M.'s dated quantities of labour 273-4, 307-12 Tooke, Thomas 457n, 6g2n; for M.'s review (1823) of Tooke's High and Low Ibices, see Quarterly Revieiu Torrens, Robert I49n, 549n, 573n, 6o2n; accuses M. of inconsistency 6-7, 656,939, 990-1; agricultural productivity and profit rates 114, 136-7; Cazenove critical of 534n; Essay on the External Corn Trade H7n, 136-7, 548n, 739; on M.'s profit theory 461-2, 474; praises M. 866; value theory 26in, 304, 323n, 343~4, 493". 494n trade 222—3, 542-62; and aggregate demand 410, 543, 585, 587-9. 606; change from exporter to importer of corn 744-5, 750-2, 763, 798; change from importer to exporter of corn 814-15; and economic growth 586-7; effect on profit rate 83-4, 85, 93; effect on rent 109; efficiency gains from 543-7, 810; and endogeneity of financial means 558-62; and expansion of aggregate value 166, 507, 542-7, 552-8, 584-5. 587-9. 618-19; internal 544-7; and international competition 177-9; M. and R. agree on gains from 222—3; measurement of 508, 552—8; and M.'s rejection of Say's Law 497; and profit rate 544~5, 547, 558, 585, 586-7; and recovery from stagnation 614-15, 618-19, 859-60; and relative corn prices 135; and sustainable growth 507, 542-7; see also free trade; trade policy trade policy: and competition of capitals 465-6, 543; duties as corrective for industrial bias 810, 823-4; liberalization 604, 614, 618-19, 825-6; M. accepts intervention in 884; see also agricultural protection; Corn Laws; corn-export bounty; free trade transfer payment: government salaries as 513—14, 5l4n; income of'unproductive' labour as 511; manufacturing income as 353-4, 358-6o, 365-7, 407; rent as loin, 354, 375-6

I N D E X 1049 transfer problem 677-8, 679-85, 686-711; M.-R. correspondence on 692-708 trend paths. See secular wage path; secular profit-rate decline Trower, H., correspondence, wRicardo— Trower in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE Tucker, Abraham 92ln Tucker, G.S.L. 686n, 8o8n Turgot, A.R.J. 375n; theory of exchange 224, 225, 249n unemployment: emigration as answer to 903; and excess capacity 599-600; government role in alleviating 624-6,899,901-3; and low money wages 598-600; and money-wage flexibility 603-5; and new technology 574—5; and postwar stagnation 586, 600-1, 603-9, 859-60; and trade liberalization 604; see also employment United States: economic growth 587; efficiency 724-5, 734; fertility of 415; and future of world supply of corn 836—7; living standards 885; population growth 19-21, 29-31, 174-6, 196, 197-9; — unchecked 37-8; prospect of diminishing returns 35, 47—8, 741—2; as special case 21, 35, 38, 58-9; stagnation 611-12 urbanization 198-9, 200-1, 204-5, 799-800 utilitarianism 917—48; case for agricultural protection 830-2; case for higher wages 912-14; and M.'s defence of Deity 932-8, 939-42, 947-8; M.'s population theory 877-8; and morality 932-6; Paley as source of M.'s 912-14, 932n, 94ln; proximity of M. andJ.S. Mill 948; and prudential control 939-42; on social organization 910-11; and social reform 891-2 utility: diminishing marginal concept 221, 23in, 268-9; distinguished from value 268-9, 962; or esteem 336-7, 345; M.'s objection to Say 268-70; in M.'s Principles 220-3 value: Bailey's causes of 339-40; cost distinguished from 276-8; determined by demand and supply 166, 247; intrinsic 634-5, 647; M. and R. differ on 221-5, 253. 277,348, 474,475; meaning of 293~4; Say's theory of exchange value 263-7; utility distinguished from 268-9; wealth distinguished from 221, 265-6, 277, 287-8, 347-8, 614; — M. uses distinction 292-3; see also demand; supply; demand-supply theory; price determination

value measurement 272-352; absolute-value concept 293-4, 305, 322-4, 329-3°, 340, 349, 963; advantages of gold 631-5; and changes in productivity 319-20; corn as measure: see com measure of value; correspondence on 321-33; in growth context 317-21; inclusion of profits in 300, 302, 319-21,324-6,328-32,345-6,349-51 ;J-S. Mill on M.'s 333-6, 341, 349, 495-7, 501; labour commanded: see labour-commanded index of value; labour embodied: see labour-embodied index of value; labour measure of exchange 164, 253; labour as true 301-2; M. and R. differ on 321-33, 552-8, 963; money by labour or labour by money 723-7; money measure: see money measure; M.'s dated quantities of labour 273-4,307-12,459-60,461,500, 962; M.'s linked corn-labour index 285-9, 301-2; M.'s search for index of purchasing power 273, 275-83, 285-93, 344-5! M.'s seashore 'silver' l67n, 169-70, 254, 283, 302, 322-3, 963; natural 317-21; precious metals 275; r°le in classical theory 272-3; R.'s 276-8, 282-93 passim, 298, 302-3, 320-33-337-42, 345-6, 349-51; R.'s exchange 254; search for invariability 282-3, 321-33; Smith's criticized by M. 106-7, 286, 293, 294-5, 347-8; and supply conditions 284, 292-6, 306-17, 327-9, 340—4; of trade 508, 552—8; and wage basket 281-2, 291-2, 299-300, 305-6, 323-9, 334; see also value; value theory value of money: defined by reference to money wage 732-4; and impact of export sector 678-9, 715-18, 723-4, 728n,730-2, 734—5; international uniformity in equilibrium 677—8, 693; trade motivated by relative international 690, 706-7 value theory: labour: see labour theory of value; in M.'s Principles 248-63; rent complexity 255-63; R.'s I49n, I5i-2n, 220-1; Say on 219, 221, 263-4, 265-6, 962; time complexity 249-51; value-in-exchange 291; 'value-in-use' 22O, 221, 265, 291; see also price theory; value; value measurement Vamplew, W. 8o8n Vansittart, Nicholas 658 velocity of circulation of money 558-9, 560-2, 694 verification, of theory 950, 975-9 vice i8n, 36—7, 196-8; as lesser of two evils 887-90, 928-30, 940-2; and 'misery' 36,

1050 I N D E X 919-20, 925, 937-8; in M.'s theological utilitarianism 917-18; or poverty 874, 883-4, 886-90, 940-1; result of prudential control 883-4, 886-90, 919-20, 928, 940-2; see also prudential control Viner, Jacob 541-2, 548-gn, 927n; effect of remittances 68in, 689n, 690-1, 704; and M. on postwar depression 599n, 610; and M. on review of Tooke 541-2; and M. on transfer problem 68ln, 68gn, 690-1, 704, 708-10; on trade 548-gn, 55on, 551-2, 556, 632, 643n virtue: meaning of 926-7, 936; in M.'s theological utilitarianism 917-18 von Boehm-Bawerk, E. 226n von Humboldt, F.H.A. 576n, 578n, 579 wage basket 136, 160, 161; corn only435n, 456-7; mixed 186, 192-3, 462-3; and value measurement 281—2, 291—2, 299-300. 305-6, 323-9, 334 wage fluctuations: downward wage path and 88, 161, 414-17, 438, 468-76; effect on profit rate 438, 468-76; M. claims neglected by R. 472-4, 488, 521 wage fund: and doctrine of proportions 423-5,427-9; and labour demand 424-5, 427, 430, 433 wages: and agricultural protection 732, 747-52, 820-3, 825-30; and birth/death ratio 59,198, 878-9; declining, see secular wage path; effect of capital accumulation 39-41, 63; effect of poor relief 593, 896-7; effect of postwar population growth 607-8; and labour demand 109-10, 419-21, 756n; and living standards 417-19; low mortality rates and 'high' 875-8,905; and oscillatory process 43-5; and population growth 3on, 786, 796, 797-8, 873, 875-6, 943-4, 946; postwar decline 4i4n, 598-600, 607-8, 613-14; and prices 40, 137, 142-3, I49n, 234, 238-40; and prudential control 187-90, 201-3, 432-3, 529, 793, 872-3, 879-80; reform policies 59-60; utilitarian case for higher wages 912-14; see also corn wage; money wage; secular wage path; wage basket; wage; fluctuations; wage fund; wage-profit relationship wage—profit relationship 5, 70-6, 86-7; both declining 5, 71-2, 156-8; both rising 157; declining profits and rising wages 251-3; exchanges between M. and R. on 156-60, 470-6, 479-85, 486-8; M.-

R. correspondence on 156-60; and money wages 74-5, 76-7n, 93, 151, 155; see also inverse wage/profit ratio; profit rate, and wages; secular profit-rate decline; secular wage path Wallace, Robert i8n, 990 Walras, Auguste 221 Walras, L. 219, 223 war: effect on paper and bullion prices 661-6; effect on taxation 610-12; impact of supply and demand changes on prices 560-2; M.'s analysis of wartime expansion 586-95; upward trend in profit rate 661-2 Waterman, A.M.C.: on equality of savings and investment 5O7n; on M.'s change on trade policy 1001-2; M.'s emphasis on 'productive' nature of agriculture 356n; on M.'s moral and religious approach 9o6n, gion, 9i8n, 926n; M.'s pessimism 741; and M.'s population theory 15-16, 24, 27n, 45-7, 4ogn, 887; on Paley 52gn, 539", 564n, 923; as influence on M. i8n, 403n,925-6 wealth: and condition of the poor 185-90; and corn prices 769-70; as first concern of political economy 999-1000; relationship with wants 532; Say on 264-5; as stock not flow 508; value distinct from 221, 265-6, 277, 287-8, 347-8, 614; — M. adopts distinction 292-3; see also national wealth West, Sir Edward 231-2, 4?6n, 739, 748n, 750n, 969 Weyland, John 6, 2o6n, 212, 799, 961, 964; M. answers criticisms in Appendix to 1817 Essay 195-203, 207, 978-9 Wheatley, John 68in, 7ogn Whewell, William 7, 9, 475, 735, 927n, 985; correspondence: see Malthus—Whewell in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE Whitbread, Samuel 897n, 900; M.'s Letter to Samuel Whitbread 798n, 878 Whitmore, W. 8?,8n Wicksell, K. 219 Wilmot Horton, R.J. See Malthus-Wilmot Horton in INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE Winch, D. 8o8n, 865n, go6n; on M.'s theology 917, gi8n, 92on, 940n women: dangers of promiscuity 933; degradation of young 888; employment of 419, 43O, 431-2, 778-80; fecundity of 197 Wrigley, Edward A. I92n, 784-5, 787 Young, Arthur 59,189, 403, 75?n, 776, 77?n, 889

INDEX TO CORRESPONDENCE

Abbreviations: Throughout the index the following abbreviations are used in subheadings: M. = Malthus R. = Ricardo MALTHUS'S CORRESPONDENCE

Malthus-Chalmers: 6 March 1832 from M. 614-15, 732, 854-5, 861, 866 18 Jan. 1833 from M. 86i-2n 16 Feb. 1833 from M. 861-2 Malthus-Godwin, 20 Aug. 1798 from M. 28 Malthus—Horner: 7 April 1811 from M. 692, 988n 16 June 1813 from M. 72, 740, 747, 765n, 810, 820-1, 824, 830n, 845n, 993 12 Feb. 1815 from Horner 8$8n, 964, 991, 993n 16 Feb. 1815 from M. 964, 991 14 March 1815 from M. 116-17, 4O5n, 459, 865n 12 June 1815 from Horner 82in, 834 Malthus-Marcet, 22 Jan. 1833 from M. 854, 855. 866 Malthus-Murray, 8 March 1815 from M. 865n Malthus-Napier 2? Sept. 1821 from M. 8o7n 8 Oct. 1821 from M. 407-8, 41 in, 965-6

Mai thus-Ricardo: iSn 16 June from M. 692, 711 18 June from R. 693 20 June from M. 695 23 June from R. 6g6n 14 July from M. 696 17 July from R. 696n, 697, 699, 703 21 July from R. 699 26 July from M. 699 2O Oct. from M. 699-700 22 Oct. from R. 700 22 Dec. from R. 701, 705 1812 I Jan. from M. 705, 7O7n 23 Feb. from M. 706, 965 17 Dec. from R. 707-8 1813 25 Feb. from R. 708 24 March from R. ?o8n 10 Aug. from R. 72, 558, 587 17 Aug. from R. 72, 558, 587, 758, 765 1814 26 June from R. 74 6 July from M. 73, 74-5, 76, 77, U4, 157 25 July from R. 76n, 77, ?8n 5 Aug. from M. 74, 75, 76, 78, 15?, 459 II Aug. from R. 76n, 79 19 Aug. from M. 79 30 Aug. from R. Son, 8l-2 11 Sept. from M. 80-1, 82 16 Sept. from R. 8l

1052 I N D E X 9 Oct. from M. 82, 88n, go, 141, 758 23 Oct. from R. 8511, 99, 157 23 Nov. from M. 86-9, 90, 129-30, 157, 758 18 Dec. from R. 8?n, gin, 9311, 99, 157 29 Dec. from M. 71-2, 83-5, 92, 95, I38n, 758 1815

13 Jan. from R. 94, 824n 6 Feb. from R. 95, no, 37g-8on 12 Feb. from M. in, I44n, 157 13 Feb. from R. ill, I44n, 379, 827n, 833, 989 9 March 1815 from R. 865n 10 March from M. 116, 118, 460, 865n 12 March from M. 116, 157, 460 14 March from R. H7n, 157 15 March from M. 118-19, 758-60 17 March from R. lign 19 March from M. 120-1, I29n, 759n 21 March from R. 121 24 March from M. 121-3, I2gn, 759n,

99m

27 March from R. 123, I27n, 656, 991 2 April from M. 123-5 4 April from R. 125-6, 460 17 April from R. 5, 126, 656 18 April from M. 127-9, 135. 141. I42n, 157,759" 21 April from R. 131-2 23 April from M. 132-3 5 May from M. 137-9, 141, 158 8 May from R. 156-7 11 June from M. 371 19 June from M. 134, I39n, I46n, 605, 760 27 June from R. I34n, 76on 16 July from M. 134-5, 7l4n, 760 30 July from R. I36n, 7i4n 26 Aug. from M. 135-6, 139, 7H, 735. 7&o 10 Sept. from R. I39n, I49n, 65?n i Oct. from M. 139-42, I73n, 657, 7i4n, 759n, 76m 7 Oct. from R. 1400, I43n, I48n, 998 11 Oct. from M. I4on, I4in, 143-4 15 Oct. from M. 657 16 Oct. from M. 145, I46n, 605, 6o6-7n, 657n 17 Oct. from R. 144, I45n, I46n, 6o6-7n, 657n, 658n, 659 30 Oct. from M. 146-8, 6o6-7n 13 Nov. from M. 148 22 Dec. from M. 150, 158, i66n, 7i4n 1816

2 Jan. from R. ison, 238n 8 Jan. from M. 151 lojan. from R. 151 7 Feb. from R. I5in 9 Feb. from M. 660 23 Feb. from R. 5, I49n, I5in, 1000 28 April from M. Hgn, I5l-2n, 660 6 Aug. from M. 149, 151-2

9 Aug. from R. I49n, 152-3 8 Sept. from M. I39n, I49n, 153-4 5 Oct. from R. I49n, 155 g Oct. from M. 155-6, I58n n Oct. from R. I56n 13 Oct. from M. 158 14 Oct. from R. 158-9 1817 n Jan. from M. 624-5, 9O1~2 24 Jan. from R. 160, gg8 26 Jan. from M. 160, 995, 998, 999 17 Aug. from M. 163-4 4 Sept. from R. 164 10 Oct. from R. 164 12 Oct. from M. 164, i65n, 166, 987 21 Oct. from R. 164-5, 207-8 3 Dec. from M. 165, 166-7, 605-6, 765, Sosn, 987 16 Dec. from R. 167, 987 1818 24 Feb. from M. 323n 24 June from R. 765 16 Aug. from M. 765, 987 20 Aug. from R. 5 21 Oct. from M. 167, 987 1819 10 Sept. from M. 167, 988 21 Sept. from R. 169-70 14 Oct. from M. 170, 171 9 Nov. from R. l7On, 171-2 28 Dec. from R. 171 1820

4 May from R. gg? 28 Aug. from M. 247n 25 Sept. from M. 268, 610, gg6n, ggg 9 Oct. from R. 247, 268n, 1000 26 Oct. from M. 247, 56?n, 988, gg4, 996, 1OOO

24 Nov. from R. 247, 994~5, 996 27 Nov. from M. 248 1821 7 July from M. 5O5n, 5ig-2O 16 July from M. 5O5n, 520-1, g8?n 10 Sept. from R. 268 13 Sept. from M. 268 28 Sept. from R. 1000

INDEX 1823 29 April from R. 321, 496 28 May from R. 322 13 July from R. 322, 323, 332n ca 21 July from M. 323, 330, 48911 3 Aug. from R. 324-5, 48911 11 Aug. from M. 325-6 15 Aug. from R. 326-7, 328 25 Aug. from M. 330-2 31 Aug. from R. 327-8, 332-3 Mai thus-Senior 23 March 1829 from M. 190 31 March 1829 from M. 854, 866, 905, 946 Malthus-Whewell 23 Feb. 1831 from M. 99411 28 Feb. 1831 from M. 953 Malthus-Wilmot Horton 7 Jan. 1927 from M. 903 22 Feb. 1930 from M. go3n 9 June 1930 from M. 903 OTHER CORRESPONDENCE

Homer—Murray 27 Oct. 1807 from Horner 6 30 Jan. 1815 from Horner 992 Horner-Seymour, 6July 1807 from Horner 6 Ricardo-Brown, 13 Oct. 1819 from R. 866-7, 1002 Ricardo-James Mill

1053

24 Oct. 1815 from R. 239, 658 14 Oct. 1816 from R. I49n 22 Dec. 1818 from R. 170-1, 988 28 Dec. 1818 from R. 5, 171 6 Sept. 1819 from R. I7in 1 Jan. 1821 from R. 986 Ricardo-McCulloch 4 Dec. 1816 from McCulloch I49n, 82?n 2 Oct. 1819 from R. 690 2 May 1820 from R. i68n, i?on 13 June 1820 from R. i68n, 170 22 Jan. 1821 from McCulloch 254n 25 Jan. 1821 from R. 254n 13 March 1821 from McCulloch 254n 25 April 1821 from R. 474n 25 March 1822 from R. 856n 21 Aug. 1823 from R. 330, 331 Ricardo-Say 11 Jan. 1820 from R. I7in 19 July 1820 from Say 268 Ricardo-Trower 583 2 March 1814 from Trower 72n, 474n 8 March 1814 from R. 72-3 29 Oct. 1815 from R. 658-9 1 July 1816 from Trower ig6n 15 July 1816 from R. I96n, 583 24 June 1820 from Trower 247 5 July 1820 from Trower 246-7 21 July 1820 from R. 247 26 Nov. 1820 from R. 288n 2 March 1821 from R. 5-6