subsistence can only increase in an arithmetical progression." Thus, Progression of Population: 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, etc. A family of two has four children; in the next generation, there will be eight, and so on, in each generation there will be a geometrical increase, until at the end of 200 years, the ratio between population and production would be 256 to 9; at the end of 300 years, 4096 to 13; and at the end of 2000 years, the difference in the ratio would have assumed enormous proportions. To quote Malthus himself (Essay, Bk. I, ch. 1): "It may safely be pronounced, 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 safely 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 melioration 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 vigor; and the increase of one period would furnish the power of a greater increase the next, and this, without any limit." The doctrine is applied to the whole world usually, but it may be applied to a country or a state, and hence it may be that the population of a country or a state will increase beyond the means of sustenance. The consequence of the increase of population over production and the upsetting of the equilibrium that should exist between population and production, will be destitution, misery, and want among the people, especially among the poorer classes, who have not the means to pay the increased prices of the necessaries of life. The increased prices will be brought about by the greater demand owing to the increased population, and the comparatively decreased supply due to the relatively smaller amount of production. To quote again (Malthus, Essay, Bk. I, ch. 2): "These effects, in the present state of society, seem to be produced in the following manner. 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 eleven millions, must now be divided among eleven millions and a half. The poor consequently must live much worse, and many of them be reduced to severe distress. The number of laborers also being above the proportion of work in the market, the price of labor must tend to fall; while the price of provisions would at the same time tend to rise. The laborer, therefore, must 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 population is nearly at a stand. In the meantime the cheapness of labor, the plenty of laborers, and the necessity of an increased industry among them, encourage cultivators to employ more labor 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 may become in the same proportion to the population as at the period at which we set out. The situation of the laborer being then again tolerably comfortable, the restraints to population are in some degree loosened; and, after a short period, the same retrograde and progressive movements, with respect to happiness, are repeated." There are, however, certain checks on population which tend to prevent it from reaching the limit where subsistence could no longer be obtained and thus retard the working out of the law. Some of these checks are positive: war, pestilence, disasters, disease, to which all the human race is subject, and which together with the condition of starvation and want due to the over-increase of population, will tend to reduce the population. When there is question of a single country, emigration is another positive means of checking the overgrowth of population, and this usually takes place in a country where living conditions are intolerable. These positive checks tend to prevent the over-increase of population and to bring about an equilibrium between population and production, so that the well-being of the race may not be disturbed. But the positive checks are not sufficient to arrest the action of the law. Another, a negative check, is recommended by Malthus; namely, self-restraint with regard to marriage and the procreation of children. People are advised not to add to the increase of population. One who foresees that he cannot provide for a family should not enter into the marriage state, and, if already married, he should not have more children than he can well provide for. As proposed by Malthus, the negative check is not immoral. When he counsels self-restraint with regard to marriage, he means that persons should not enter into marriage unless they have an assured means of providing for their offspring. When he counsels self-restraint among married people with regard to the procreation of children, he means that this should be taken in the strictly moral sense. In his Essay, Bk. I, ch. 2, he says: "Of the preventive checks, the restraint from marriage which is not followed by irregular gratifications may properly be termed moral restraint." A note hereto is appended: "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 mar riage, from prudential motives, with a conduct strictly moral during the period of this restraint; and I have never intentionally deviated from this sense. . . Such is the doctrine called the doctrine of Malthus. It has been defended by economists of great repute, and it has been rejected by others equally renowned. It has gradually permeated society, and has had a most pernicious effect, giving rise to many of the crimes against humanity so numerous in entire nations to-day. The Malthusians, so-called followers of Malthus, seem to have cut adrift from all moral principle, and have taught that for the betterment of the human race its increase must be curtailed by every means however vicious and immoral. Hence the preva lence in many countries and in many parts of the United States of crimes against nature, of infanticide and abortion, and all the evil effects, individual and social, resulting from such a state of things. Doctrine of Malthus Rejected.—(1) From the Moral Standpoint. The preventive check, even if understood as a moral and prudential abstinence from marriage and the natural results of marriage, and even if advocated along strictly moral lines, is based on a too optimistic view of human nature, which supposes such self-restraint possible among the great generality of men, and especially among the too frequently ill-educated poorer classes. It supposes an impossible degree of virtue among people who, by circumstances, surroundings, and lack of education and selfdiscipline, would naturally be least capable of possessing it. Hence the adoption of such a principle of action, if adopted at all, will undoubtedly be followed by all kinds of evil and vicious practices. There is, however, a possibility that the principle will not be adopted at all by certain classes of people. Thus, there exists among the poorer classes a motive that would induce them to have as large a progeny as possible. This motive is the hope of the parents of increasing their own income through the work of The their children. The children are put to work at an early age and the wages of the children add to the family revenue. grown-up sons and daughters, moreover, are relied on to support the parents in their old age. Indeed, the effects of the doctrine are seen not so much among the very poor, though they are gradually increasing even there, as among the wealthier and more educated classes, who are not wanting in the means to support and educate a numerous offspring. The doctrine of Malthus is rejected by many on account of its pernicious tendency to the promotion of immoral practices. It is attacked by others from an economic point of view. (2) From the Economic Standpoint. — It is denied that production has not kept pace with population. Whatever may have been the condition of things during the life of Malthus, since his time there has been an immense improvement in productive methods and an immense increase in the resulting product. The introduction of machinery, the large-scale methods of production only now in their beginning, the opening up of new lands, the intensive cultivation of old lands, the acquisition of new countries with all their untold wealth, have in the past century given production a great gain in advance of the growing population. Nor is there any well-grounded fear for the future, for it is impossible to conceive that productive forces have reached their limit of efficiency or inventiveness. When new demands are made, new means of satisfying the demands will be created. The doctrine of Malthus has indeed ceased to be the bugbear it formerly was. Yet it is given prominence to-day by many who would seek an easy way of explaining the misery and want that exist among the poorer classes, and who would divert attention from the real causes of present conditions. These causes are not overpopulation and insufficient production, but are to be sought for rather in the improper methods of the distribution of wealth, in human injustice and selfishness, in the spirit of greed that closes the hearts of men to the dictates |