rendering them more abundant nor deficient, it can have no influence on prices. Whether a farmer grows corn on his own land, or on land he rents, he will ask the same price for it; that is, the highest price he can get, or which, from the competition among buyers, they will be disposed to give. The abolition of rents, therefore, would only tend to enrich the farmers; it would enable them to keep a bailiff, steward, or tenant, to do their work; in short, to take the places of their landlords, without in the least benefiting the consumers of their produce.

8. The abolition of rents would not tend to raise

wages.

Whether a labourer is hired by a landowner or his tenant, he is hired at the lowest wages he will submit to work for. If the farmer's rent were remitted, he would continue to go to market on the same principle; that is, of having all his work done at the lowest price. Conscience does not enter into these bargains; they are all regulated on a principle of business; that is, of saving all that can be saved, and gaining all that can be gained. This is seen in Ireland, where, from the redundancy of labourers, they are sometimes forced to work for 2d. or 3d. a day, and masters are not ashamed to give this miserable pittance. The legislature tried to remedy a similar evil centuries ago, but their efforts were found futile or mischievous, and they found that the only cure for an overstocked market of labour was to lessen the supply.

CHAP. XIII.

TENDENCY TO OVER-POPULATION.

Mankind increase faster than Food-Limit to the Increase of the Species-Further increase in all Countries checked by Poverty or Prudence Religious Objection "answeredRemedies of Over-Population-Natural and Artificial Checks -Deterioration of Society by the Operation of the Natural Check of Misery-Reasons for Marriage in preference to Concubinage-Circumstances which make Marriage an Evil -Scriptural Injunction, "Be Fruitful and Multiply," considered-Obligation to maintain Children-Policy of further Legislative Restraints on Marriage-Decrease in the num ber of Marriages-Proposals for divesting Wedlock of its impoverishing Consequences-Emigration an unobjectionable Remedy of a Redundant Population-Symptoms of an Excess of People described-Question of the Relative Increase of Population and Capital during the last Thirty Years-Decrease of Mortality-Over-Population results from defect of Moral Culture-Importance of the Subject, and the Poor more interested in it than the Rich-A Popular Knowledge of the Principles of Population the only permanent Remedy of Poverty and low Wages.

THE history of man affords indubitable evidence of the rapid tendency of mankind to increase, and those who adopt the authority of the Scripture can hardly refuse assent to the theory of population. Adam and Eve are the parents of the human race, and by the descendants of a single pair the whole earth has been peopled. Upon this fact the reli

gious might found their faith in the prolific nature of our species, but the narrative of the Bible is corroborated by the testimony of history.

Romulus and Remus, aided by a few followers, founded the Roman empire. The states of Italy and of Greece, and the nations of Asia, were the offspring of a few exiles, or colonists, driven from their homes by crime or want, or internal dissensions. In more recent times America offers a striking example of the progress of nations. Almost within the cognizance of the existing generation this great continent has been discovered, reclaimed, and comparatively filled with inhabitants. Individuals, no less than nations, attest the principle of population. Sterility is the exception, not the rule of life. Of the thousands united by marriage, within immediate observance, how few there are who do not leave behind them a progeny treble their own number, and with similar powers of propagation.

This great law of nature is not limited to man, it extends in equal force to the animal and vegetable creations. A couple of rabbits, or flock of sheep, would fill the whole earth, if their increase were not checked by want of food, or space or climate. If the earth were vacant it might be sowed and overspread with a single grain of wheat, or with a single plant, as fennel, or henbane. In all these cases the law of increase is the same, whether as affects man, or animals or vegetables; they all increase in a geometric ratio, and the necessity that limits their

indefinite multiplication is the impossibility of obtaining an indefinite amount of subsistence.

The propagation of plants and animals is limited by the bounds of the earth, and these again limit the propagation of man, dependent as he is upon them for subsistence. If the supply of food could be indefinitely extended, the numbers of mankind might be indefinitely multiplied. But though the produce of the earth, in a given space, may be increased by additional labour and improved modes of culture, this increase is not proportionate; a a double expenditure of labour on the soil will not obtain a double produce, nor a treble expenditure a treble produce: the increase obtained continues to bear a less and less proportion to the labour expended. There is, however, no diminution in the procreative power of man; as his numbers augment there is no proportionate diminution either in inclination or ability to propagate his race. The procreative power is a constant quantity, while the supply of food is a quantity constantly decreasing. It follows that we are reduced to one of two alternatives; either to the necessity of controlling the natural tendency of man to increase, or of submitting to live on a quantity of food constantly diminishing. But this must have its limits; for if man continue to multiply at a uniform rate, and the supply of food to diminish, he will at length reach that minimum of allowance inadequate to support life, and further increase be checked by absolute starvation.

Man is seldom placed in circumstances which admit of the full development of his procreative energy. In civilized communities he is restrained by prudential motives; among savages the sexual passion is unchecked, but the evils inseparable from a state of nature tend either to lessen the number of births, or cause premature mortality. The power, however, of every nation to people up to and exceed its means of support is fully evinced in the rapidity with which the ravages of war, of famine, and epidemics are supplied, and the speed with which newly-settled countries, abounding in the means of subsistence and employment, are peopled.

In rude or refined states of society the number of consumers is mostly commensurate to the existing supply of food; were there any discrepancy the chasm would be speedily filled by the activity of one of our strongest passions, aided by the facilities abundance would offer for the nurture and maintenance of children. But though nations increase up to the limit of subsistence, this limit itself varies with the degree of refinement, which has fixed among them different standards of living. The limit of subsistence to a Norwegian is the bark of the linden-tree; of a New Zealander fish and worms; of a South American the fruit of the banana; of a Chinese a dish of rice; of an Irishman a bowl of potatoes; while an Englishman, more elevated than any, fixes the necessaries of life in animal food, beer, and wheaten bread.

Higher is the standard of subsistence which the