72。Ibid。，p。135，M’Cullochadmitsthepossibilitythatamanmayjudgehisowninterestswrongly，butthinksthathiswillnothappeninonecaseoutoftwentyIbid。，p。
　　15。
　　73。SeeTorrens’sProductionofWealth，p。208；andM’Culloch’sPoliticalEconomy1843，p。294，whereheadmitsmoreexceptions。
　　74。ExternalCorn-Trade，p。87，etc。
　　75。PoliticalEconomysecondedition，pp。21，22。
　　76。Ibid。，p。67。
　　77。PoliticalEconomy1925，p。329。
　　78。ProductionofWealth，p。34，etc。
　　79。PoliticalEconomy1825，p。318。
　　80。Mill’sPoliticalEconomysecondedition，p。102；M’Culloch’sPoliticalEconomy1825，pp。289-291。
　　81。M’Culloch’sPoliticalEconomy，p。290。
　　82。PrefacetoExternalCorn-trade。
　　83。Ibid。，p。95。
　　84。PoliticalEconomy1825，pp。313-18。Thisargumentdisappearsinlatereditions。
　　85。Ibid。，p。217。
　　86。PoliticalEconomy，p。221。DeQuinceymakesagreatpointofthisdoctrine，ofwhichitisnotworthwhiletoexaminethemeaning。
　　87。PoliticalEconomy，p。221n。
　　88。Ibid。，p。336。
　　89。Ibid。，p。337。
　　90。’EssayuponthecircumstanceswhichdeterminetheRateofWages。’1826，p。113。ThiswaswrittenforConstable’sMiscellany，andismainlyrepetitionfromthePoliticalEconomy。Itwasrepublished，withalterations，in1851。
　　91。PoliticalEconomy，pp。359-61。
　　92。Ibid。，1843，p。178。
　　AndseehisremarksontheunfavourablesideoftheFactorySystem，p。
　　186seq。
　　93。’Wherevertwopersonshavethemeansofsubsisting，’ashequaintlyobserves，’amarriageinvariablytakesplace。’PoliticalEconomy，p。154。
　　94。PoliticalEconomy，p。206。
　　95。PoliticalEconomy，p。344。
　　96。Ibid。，pp。349-52。
　　97。Seepamphletontherateofwages，pp。178-204。
　　98。Tooke’sThoughtsandDetailsontheHighandLowPricesofthelastThirtyYearsappearedin1823secondedition1824。ThiswasrewrittenandembodiedintheHistoryofPrices，thefirsttwovolumesofwhichappearedin1838。Fourlatervolumesappearedin1839，1848，and1857。
　　99。ThepopularviewisgivenbySouthey。TheRadicals，hesaysin1923，desirewarbecausetheyexpectittoleadtorevolution。’Inthistheyaregreatlydeceived，foritwouldrestoreagriculturalprosperity，andgiveanewspurtoourmanufactures。’
　　SelectionfromSouthey’sLetters，iii，382。SeealsoLifeandCorrespondence，iv，228，286。
　　Chapter6：EconomicHereticsI。TheMalthusianControversyTheEconomictheorybecametriumphant。Expoundedfromnewuniversitychairs，summarisedintextbooksforschools，advocatedinthepress，andappliedbyanenergeticpartytosomeofthemostimportantpoliticaldiscussionsoftheday，itclaimedtheadhesionofallenlightenedpersons。Itenjoyedtheprestigeofascientificdoctrine，andthemostpopularretortseemedtobeaninvoluntaryconcessionofitsclaims。Whenopponentsappealedfrom’theorists’topracticalmen，theUtilitariansscornfullysetthemdownasvirtuallyappealingfromreasontoprejudice。Norivaltheoryheldthefield。IfMalthusandRicardodiffered，itwasadifferencebetweenmenwhoacceptedthesamefirstprinciples。
　　TheybothprofessedtointerpretAdamSmithasthetrueprophet，andrepresenteddifferentshadesofopinionratherthandivergingsects。Therewere，however，symptomsofopposition，which，atthetime，mightbesetdownassimplereluctancetolistentodisagreeabletruths。Inreality，theywereindicationsofadissatisfactionwhichwastobecomeofmoreimportanceandtoleadintimetoamoredecidedrevolt。Imustindicatesomeofthem，thoughtheexpressionsofdissentweresovariousandconfusedthatitisnotveryeasytoreducethemtoorder。
　　Malthus’sdoctrinewasreallyatthebaseofthewholetheory，thoughitmustbeadmittedthatneitherMalthushimselfnorhisopponentswereclearastowhathisdoctrinereallywas。Hisassailantsoftenattackedtheorieswhichhedisavowed，orassertedprincipleswhichheclaimedashisown。1ImentiononlytosetasidesomerespectableandwearisomegentlemensuchasIngram，Jarrold，Weyland，andGrahame，whoconsideredMalthuschieflyasimpugningthewisdomofProvidence。Theyquotethedivinelaw，’increaseandmultiply’；thinkthatMalthusregardsviceandmiseryasblessings，andprovethatpopulationdoesnot’tend’toincreasetoorapidly。JarroldapparentlyacceptsthedoctrinewhichMalthusattributestoSü；ssmilch，thatliveshavebeenshortenedsincethedaysofthepatriarchs，andthereproductiveforcesdiminishedastheworldhasgrownfuller。Grahamebelievesinaprovidential’ordeal，’constitutedbyinfantmortality，whichisnot，likewarandvice，duetohumancorruption，butabeneficentregulatingforcewhichcorrelatesfertilitywiththestateofsociety。ThismightbetakenbyMalthusasmerelyamountingtoanotherversionofhischecks。Suchbooks，infact，simplyshow，whatdoesnotrequiretobefurtheremphasised，thatMalthushadputhisversionofthestruggleforexistenceintoaformwhichseemedscandaloustotheaverageorthodoxperson。ThevaguenessofMalthushimselfandtheconfusedargumentofsuchopponentsmakesitdoubtfulwhethertheyarereallyansweringhistheoriesorreducingthemtoalessrepulsiveformofstatement。
　　Inotherdirections，theMalthusiandoctrinerousedkeenfeelingonbothsides，andthelinetakenbydifferentpartiesissignificant。Malthushadappearedasanantagonistoftherevolutionaryparty。Hehadlaiddownwhathetooktobeaninsuperableobstacletotherealisationoftheirdreams。YethisviewswereadoptedandextendedbythosewhocalledthemselvesthoroughRadicals。As，inourdays，Darwinismhasbeenclaimedassupportingbothindividualistandsocialisticconclusions，thetheoryofhispredecessor，Malthus，mightbeappliedinaRadicaloraConservativesense。Inpointoffact，MalthuswasatonceadoptedbytheWhigs，asrepresentedbytheEdinburghReview。
　　TheywerefollowersofAdamSmithandDugaldStewart；theypiquedthemselves，and，asevenJamesMilladmitted，withjustice，uponeconomicorthodoxy。
　　TheywereatthesametimepredisposedtoatheorywhichcondemnedtherevolutionaryUtopias。Itprovidedthemwithaneffectiveweaponagainsttheagitatorswhomtheyespeciallydreaded。TheToriesmightbealittlerestrainedbyorthodoxqualms。In1812SoutheywaspermittedtomakeanonslaughtuponMalthusintheQuarterly；2butmorecomplimentaryallusionsfollowed，andfiveyearslatertheessaywaselaboratelydefendedinanablearticle。3Anapologywaseveninsinuatedforthepreviousassault，thoughtheblamewasthrownuponMalthusforputtinghisdoctrinesinanoffensiveshape。AreferencetoOwensuggeststhatthealarmexcitedbySocialismhadsuggestedtheneedofsomesoundpoliticaleconomy。
　　Anothercontroversywhichwasbeingcarriedonatintervalsindicatesthelineofcleavagebetweenthecapitalistandthelandedinterest。JamesMil’searlypamphlet，CommerceDefended1808，andTorrens’spamphlet，EconomistsRefuted，weresuggestedbythisdiscussion。AlthoughthewarwaspartlyindefenceofBritishtrade，itsvicissitudesproducedvariouscommercialcrises；
　　andthepatrioticTorieswereanxioustoshowthatwecouldthriveevenifourtradewasshutoutfromtheContinent。Thetradingclassesmaintainedthattheyreallysuppliedthesinewsofwar，andhadarighttosomecontrolofthepolicy。ThecontroversyabouttheordersincouncilandBerlindecreesemphasisedthesedisputes，andcalledsomeattentiontothequestionsinvolvedintheoldcontroversybetweenthe’mercantile’andthe’agricultural’
　　systems。AgrotesqueexaggerationofonetheorywasgivenbyMill’sopponent，WilliamSpence41783-1860，inhisBritainIndependentofCommerce，whichwentthroughseveraleditionsin1808，andrefurbishedorpervertedthedoctrineoftheFrencheconomists。Theargument，atleast，showswhatfallaciesthenneededconfutationbytheorthodox，intheprefacetohiscollectedtracts，Spenceobservesthatthehighpriceofcornwasthecauseof’allourwealthandprosperityduringthewar。’TheCausesofthehighprice’assisted，’headmits，’byoccasionalbadseasons’
　　werethe’nationaldebt，inotherwords，taxation，’whichraisedtheprice，first，ofnecessaries，andthenofluxuriesthus，hesays，’neutralisingitsotherwiseinjuriouseffects’，andthevirtualmonopolybytheagriculturistofthehomemarket。5Allourwealth，thatis，wasproducedbytaxationaidedbyfamine，or，inbrief，bythelandowner’spowerofsqueezingmoreoutofthepoor。Foreigntrade，accordingtoSpence，isaltogethersuperfluous。ItseffectissummedupbythestatementthatwegivehardwaretoAmerica，and，inreturn，getonly’thevileweed，tobacco。’6Spence’swritingsonlyshowtheeffectofstrongprejudicesonaweakbrain。
　　Asimilarsentimentdictatedamorenoteworthyargumenttoamuchablerwriter，whoserelationtoMalthusissignificant——ThomasChalmers1780-1847，7probablybestrememberedatpresentforhisleadershipofthegreatdisruptionof1843。Hehadareputationforeloquenceandphilosophicabilitynotfullyintelligibleatthepresentday。Hisappearancewasuncouth，andhiswrittenstyleisoftenclumsy。Hegaveanimpressionattimesofindolenceandoftimidity。Yethissuperficialqualitiesconcealedanardenttemperamentandcordialaffections。Underasufficientstimulushecouldblazeoutinstirringspeechandvigorousaction。Hisintellectualtrainingwaslimited。
　　Hehad，wearetold，beenmuchinfluencedinhisyouthbytheFrenchphilosophersofthetime，andhadappearedonthesideofthemorefreethinkingpartyinthefamousLesliecontroversy，Soonafterwards，however，hewasconvertedto’evangelical’views。HestillacceptedThomasBrownasagreatmetaphysician，8butthoughtthatmoralquestionsBrown’sdeisticaloptimismrequiredtobecorrectedbyaninfusionofButler’stheoryofconscience。HecouldadaptButler’sAnalogy，andwriteedifyingBridgewatertreatise。
　　Ineedonlysay，however，that，thoughhisphilosophywasnotveryprofoundhehadanenthusiasmwhichenableshimattimetowriteforciblyandimpressively。
　　Chalmerswasfrom1803to1815ministerofKilmany，Fifeshire，andhisattentionhadalreadydrawntothequestionofpauperism。HetookpartintheSpencecontroversy，byanessayupontheExtentofStabilityofNationalResources。9InthisheexpoundeddoctrinewhichisafterwardsgiveninhisPoliticalEconomyinConnectionwiththeMoralStateandMoralofAspectsSociety。10Themainpurposeofhisearlybookisthuspatriotic。Itismeant，likeSpence’spamphlet，toprovethatNapoleoncoulddousnovitalinjury。
　　Shouldhesucceed，hewouldonlylopoffsuperfluousbranches，nothewdownthemaintrunk。Chalmers’sargumenttoshowtheeasewithwhichacountrymayrecovertheeffectsofadisastrouswarishighlypraisedbyJ。S。Mill11asthefirstsoundexplanationofthefacts。Chalmers’sposition，however，isradicallydifferentfromthepositionofeitherJamesorJ。S。Mill，EssentiallyitisthedevelopmentoftheFrencheconomists’