" with an unchecked increase of people." This I confess is a singular passage for a practical philosopher to write. Mr. Malthus here lays it down that the question is not whether we should do all the good we can, but whether we should do what we cannot. As to his illustration of a man locked up in a room, though it is smart and clever, it is not much to the purpose. The case is really that of a man who has the range of a suite of rooms and who in a fit of the spleen, or from indolence, or stupidity, or from any other cause you please, confines himself to one of them, or of a man who having hired a large commodious apartment, says, I never make use of the 'whole of this apartment, I never go within a foot of the walls, I might as well have it partitioned off, it would be snugger and warmer, and so still finding that he does not run against his partition any more than against the wall, should continue, being determined to have no unnecessary spareroom, to heim himself in closer and closer till at last he would be able to stir neither hand nor foot. That any one, allowing as Mr. Malthus does, that with proper management and industry this country might be made to maintain double its present number of inhabitants, or twenty millions instead of ten, should at the same time affect to represent this as a mere trifling addition, that practically speaking cannot be

:

taken into the account, can I think only be explained by supposing in that person either an extreme callousness of feeling, or which amounts to pretty much the same thing, a habit of making his opinions entirely subservient to his convenience, or to any narrow purpose he may have in view at the moment.-Perhaps if the truth were known, I am as little sanguine in my expectations of any great improvement to be made in the condition of human life either by the visions of philosophy, or by downright, practical, parliamentary projects, as Mr. Malthus himself can be. But the matter åppears to me thus. It requires some exertion and some freedom of will to keep even where we are. If we tie up our hands, shut our eyes to the partial advantages we possess, and cease to exert ourselves in that direction in which we can do it with the most effect, we shall very soon "go deep in the negative series." Take away the hope and the tendency to improvement, and there is nothing left to counteract the opposite never-failing tendency of human things "from bad to worse." There is therefore a serious practical reason against losing sight of the object, even when we cannot attain it. However, I am "free to confess" (to borrow the language of my betters) that there is as much selfishness as public spirit in my resistance to Mr. Malthus's contradictions. It is a remote question whether the world will ever be much wiser than it is: but what I am certainly interested in, is not to submit to have all my ideas confounded by barren sophistry, nor to give up the little understanding which I may actually possess. Nor for my own part, were I confined to my room, should I think myself obliged to any one for blocking up my view of a pleasant prospect, because I could not move from the place, where I was.

The fundamental principle of Mr. Malthus's essay is that population has a constant tendency to become excessive, because it has a tendency to increase not only in a progressive, but in a geometrical ratio, whereas the means of subsistence are either positively limited, or at most can only be made to increase in an arithmetical ratio. But to be sure of avoiding any thing like misrepresentation in this part of the argument, where the least error or omission might be fatal to our author's whole scheme, let us take his own words.

"It may be safely affirmed that population "when unchecked goes on doubling itself every "twenty-five years, or increases in a geometrical " That we may be the better able to com" pare the increase of population and food, let " us make a supposition, which without pre"tending to accuracy, is clearly more favourable "to the power of production in the earth, than any experience that we have had of its quali"ties 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 quan"tity 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.

"If this supposition be applied to the whole "earth, and it it be allowed that the subsistence " for man which the earth affords, might be in"creased every twenty-five years by a quantity " equal to what it at present produces; this will " be supposing a rate of increase much greater " than we can imagine that any possible exer"tions of mankind could make it.

"It may be fairly pronounced therefore that "considering the present average state of the "earth, the means of subsistence, under cir"cumstances the most favourable to human in"dustry, could not possibly be made to increase "faster than in an arithmetical ratio.

"The necessary effects of these two different " rates of increase, when brought together, will " be very striking. Let us call the population " of this island eleven millions; and suppose "the present produce equal to the easy sup"port of such a number. In the first twenty" five years the population would be twenty" two millions, and the food being also doubled, "the means of subsistence would be equal to "this increase. In the next twenty-five years, "the population would be forty-four millions, "and the means of subsistence only equal to "the support of thirty-three millions. In the "next period, the population would be eighty"eight millions, and the means of subsistence "just equal to the support of half that number. "And at the conclusion of the first century, "the population would be a hundred and "seventy-six millions, and the means of sub"sistence only equal to the support of fifty" five millions; leaving a population of a hun