theory，thoughChalmersisratherunwillingtoadmithisaffinitytoadiscreditedschool。12Hehasreachedsomeoftheirconclusions，headmits，butbyadifferentpath。13Hecoincides，inthisrespect，withMalthus，whowasequallyimpressedbytheimportanceof’subsistence，’
　　orofthefood-supplyofthelabourer。Thegreatbulkofthefoodrequiredmustberaisedwithinourownborders。AsChalmerssays，in1832，thetotalimportationofcorn，eveninthetwofamineyears，1800and1801，takentogether，hadonlyprovidedfoodforfiveweeks，14andcouldnormallyrepresentamerefringeorsuperfluousadditiontoourresources。
　　Hismainargumentissimple。Theeconomistshavefallenintoafatalerror。
　　Amanufacturer，heobserves，onlymakeshisownarticle。15Theeconomistssomehowimaginethathealsosupportshimself。Youseeaprosperous’shawl-makingvillage。’Youinferthatitsruinwouldcausethedestitutionofsomanyfamilies。Itwouldonlymeanthelossofsomanyshawls。Thefoodwhichsupportstheshawl-makerswouldstillbeproduced，andwouldbeonlydivertedtosupportmakersofsomeotherluxury。16Therewouldbeatemporaryinjurytoindividuals，butnopermanentweakeningofnationalresources。Hencewehavehisdivisionofthepopulation。Theagriculturists，andthosewhomakethe’secondnecessaries’thecottages，ploughs，andsoforth，requiredbytheagriculturist，createthegreatwealthofthecountry。Besidesthesewehavethe’disposable’population，whichisemployedinmakingluxuriesforthelandowners，and，finally，the’redundant’orwhathecallsinhislaterbookthe’excrescent’or’superinduced’population，17whichisreallysupportedbyforeigntrade。Commerce，then，ismerely’theefflorescenceofouragriculture。’18Wereitannihilatedthisinstant，weshouldstillretainourwholedisposablepopulation。Theeffectofwarissimplytofindadifferentemploymentforthispartofthenation。Napoleon，hesays，is’emptyingourshopsandfillingourbattalions。’19Allthe’redundant’populationmightbesupportedbysimplydiminishingthenumberofourcart-horses。20Similarly，thedestructionofthecommerceofFrance’createdherarmies。’
　　Itonlytransferredmenfromtradetowar，and’millionsofartisans’were’transformedintosoldiers。’21Pittwasreallystrengtheningwhenhesupposedhimselftoberuininghisenemy。’Excrescence’and’efflorescence’
　　areChalmers’sequivalentforthe’sterility’oftheFrencheconomists。
　　Thebackboneofallindustryisagriculture，andthemanufacturerssimplyemployedbythelandownerforsuchpurposesashepleases。Whetherheusesthemtomakehisluxuriesortofighthisbattles，therealresourcesofthenationremainuntouched，theRicardiansinsistuponthevitalimportanceof’capital。’Theoneeconomicendofthestatesmen，asthecapitalistclassnaturallythinks，shouldbetogiveeveryfacilityforitsaccumulation，andconsequentlyforallowingittodistributeitselfinthemostefficientway。Chalmers，onthecontrary，arguesthatwemayeasilyhavetoomuchcapital。Hewasafirmbelieveringluts。Headmitsthattheextensionofcommercewasofgreatgoodattheendofthefeudalperiod，butnotasthe’efficientcause’ofwealth，onlyas’unlockingthecapabilitiesofthesoil。’22Thischangeproducedtheillusionthatcommercehasa’creativevirtue，’whereasitsabsolutedependenceuponagricultureisatruthofcapitalimportanceinpoliticaleconomy。MoreMalthusianthanMalthus，Chalmersarguesthattheofcapitalisstrictlyparalleltothecaseofpopulation。23Theymayberedundantasmuchasmen，andtherealcausesofeveryeconomiccalamityarethe’over-speculationofcapitalists，’andthe’over-populationofthecommunityatlarge。’24Inthisquestion，however，Chalmersgetsintodifficulties，whichshowsohopelessaconfusionbetween’capital，’income，andmoney，butIneednotattempttounravelhismeaning。25Anyhow，heisledtoapprovetheFrenchdoctrineofthesingletax。Ultimately，hethinks，alltaxesfalluponrent。26Agriculturefillsthegreatreservoirfromwhichallthesubsidiarychannelsarefiled。Whetherthestreambetappedatthesourceorfurtherdownmakesnodifference。Henceheinfersthat，asthelandlordsnecessarilypaythetaxes，theyshouldpaythemopenly。
　　Byanoddcoincidence，hewouldtaxrentslikeMill，thoughuponoppositegrounds，Heholdsthattheinterestofthelandownersisnotopposedto，butidenticalwith，theinterestofallclasses。Politically，aswellaseconomically，theyshouldbesupreme，theyare，’naturallyandproperly，thelordsoftheascendant，’and，asheoddlycomplainsintheyearoftheReformBill，not，sufficientlyrepresentedinparliament，’27A’splendidaristocracy’is，hethinks，anecessarypartofthesocialedifice；28thelawofprimogenitureisnecessarytosupportthem；andthedivisionoflandwillcausethedecayofFrance，thearistocracyarewantedtokeepupahighstandardofcivilisationandpromotephilosophy，science，andart。29TheBritisharistocracyinthereignofGeorgeIVscarcelyrealisedthisideal，andwouldhardlyhaveperceivedthattoplaceallthetaxesupontheirshoulderswouldbetogivethemablessingindisguise。AccordingtoChalmers，however，anestablishedchurchrepresentsanessentialpartoftheupperclasses，andisrequiredtopromoteahighstandardoflifeamongthepoor。30Inconnectionwiththis，hewritesareallyforciblechaptercriticisingtheeconomicaldistinctionofproductiveandunproductivelabour，andshowsatleastthatthedirectcreationofmaterialwealthisnotasufficientcriterionoftheutilityofaclass。
　　Chalmers’sargumentsareofinterestmainlyfromtheirbearinguponhispracticalapplicationoftheMalthusianproblem。HisinterestintheproblemofpauperismhadbeenstimulatedbyhisresidenceinGlasgow，wherefrom1815to1823hehadbeenactivelyengagedinparochialduties。In1819hehadsetupanorganisedsystemofcharityinapoordistrict，whichbothreducedtheexpenditureandimprovedtheconditionofthepoor。Theexperiment，thoughdroppedsomeyearslater，becamefamous，andinlateryearsChalmerssuccessfullystartedasimilarplaninEdinburgh。ItwasthisexperiencewhichgaveshapetohisMalthusiantheories。Hewas，thatis，aMalthusianinthesenseofbelievingthatthegreatproblemwasessentiallytheproblemofraisingtheself-respectandspiritofindependenceofthepoor。ThegreatevilwhichconfrontedhiminGlasgowwasthemischiefconnectedwiththegrowthofthefactorysystem。Hesaw，ashethought，thedevelopmentofwealthleadingtothedegradationofthelabourer。Thegreatsocialphenomenonwasthetendencytodegeneration，thegradualdissolutionofanorganism，andcorruptiondestroyingthevitalforces。Ontheonehand，thisspectacleledhim，asitledothers，tolookbackfondlytothegoodoldtimesofhomelyfoodandprimitivehabits，tothepeasantryasrepresentedinBurns’sCotter’sSaturdayNightorScott’sHeartofMidlothian，whenthepoormanwaspartofasocial，political，andecclesiasticalorder，disciplined，trained，andself-respecting，notaloosewaifandstrayinachaoticwelterofseparateatoms。Thesewerethefactswhichreallysuggestedhistheoryofthe’excrescent’population，producedbytheoverspeculationofcapitalists，thepaupersofGlasgowwere’excrescent，’andthe’gluts’
　　werevisibleinthecommercialcriseswhichhadthrownnumbersofpoorweaversoutofemploymentanddegradedthemintopermanentpaupers。Thefactswerebeforehiseyes，ifthegeneralisationwashastyandcrude，Heheld，ontheotherhand，thatindiscriminatecharity，andstillmoretheestablishmentbypoor-lawsofalegalrighttosupport，wasstimulatingtheevil。Thepoor-lawhadworkedincalculablemischiefsinEngland，31andhestruggledvigorously，thoughunavailingly，toresistitsintroductionintoScotland。Chalmers，however，didnotacceptthetheoryascribedtotheUtilitarians，thattheremedyfortheevilswassimplytoleavethingsalone。Hegiveshistheoryinanarticleupontheconnectionbetweentheextensionofthechurchandtheextinctionofpauperism。HedefendsMalthusagainstthe’execrations’ofsentimentalism。Malthus，hethinks，wouldnotsuppressbutchangethedirectionofbeneficence。Avastexpenditurehasonlystimulatedpauperism。Thetruecourseisnottodiminishtheratesbuttomakethem’flowintothewholesomechannelofmaintaininganextendedsystemofmoralandreligiousinstruction。’32Inotherwords，suppressworkhousesbutbuildschoolsandchurches；organisecharityandsubstituteasystematicindividualinspectionforrecklessandindiscriminatealmsgiving。Thenyouwillgettotherootofthemischief。Thechurch，supportedfromtheland，istobecomethegreatcivilisingagent。Chalmers，accordingly，wasanardentadvocateofachurchestablishment。HebecametheleaderoftheFreeChurchmovementnotasobjectingtoanestablishmentonprinciple，butbecausehethoughtthattheactuallegalfettersoftheScottishestablishmentmadeitimpossibletocarryoutaneffectivereorganisationandthereforeunabletodischargeitstruefunctions。
　　HereChalmers’seconomicaltheoriesarecrossedbyvariouspoliticalandecclesiasticalquestionswithwhichIamnotconcerned。Hispeculiaritiesasaneconomistbringout，Ithink，animportantpoint。HeshowshowMalthus’sviewsmightbeinterpretedbyamanwho，insteadofsharing，wasentirelyopposedtotheordinarycapitalistprejudices。ItwouldbeidletoaskwhichwasthemorelogicaldevelopmentofMalthus。Whentwosystemsarefullofdoubtfulassumptionsoffactandquestionablelogicandvagueprimaryconceptions，thatquestionbecomeshardlyintelligible。Wecanonlynotethevariousturnsgiventotheargumentbythepreconceivedprejudicesofthedisputants。BymostofthemtheMalthusianviewwasinterpretedasimplyingthecapitalistasdistinguishedfromthelandowningpointofview。
　　ToSoutheyastoChalmersthegreatevilofthedaywasthegrowthofthedisorganisedpopulaceunderthefactorysystem。ThedifferenceisthatwhileChalmersenthusiasticallyadoptedMalthus’stheoryasindicatingthetrueremedyfortheevil，Southeyregardsitwithhorrorasdeclaringtheeviltobeirremediable。Chalmers，ashrewdScotactivelyengagedinparochialwork，hadhisattentionfixedupontherecklessimprovidenceofthe’excrescent’population，andwelcomedadoctrinewhichlaidstressuponthenecessityofraisingthestandardofprudenceandmorality。Herecognisedandpointedoutwithgreatforcetheinadequacyofsuchpalliativesasemigration，home-colonisation，andsoforth。33Southey，anardentandimpulsivemanofletters，withnopracticalexperienceofthedifficultiesofsocialreform，hasnopatienceforsuchinquiries。Hisremedy，inallcases，wasa’paternalgovernment’vigorouslyregulatingsociety；andMalthusappearstohimtobesimplyanopponentofallsuchaction。Southeyhadbeguntheattackin1803byanarticleintheAnnualRevieweditedbyA。
　　AikinforwhichtheleadinghintsweregivenbyColeridge，thenwithSoutheyatKeswick，34inhislettersandhislaterarticleshenevermentionsMalthuswithoutabhorrence。35Malthus，accordingtohisarticleintheAnnualReview，regards’vice’and’misery’
　　asdesirable；thinksthatthe’gratificationoflust’isa’physicalnecessity’；
　　andattributestothe’physicalconstitutionofournature’whatshouldbeascribedtothe’existingsystemofsociety。’Malthus，thatis，isafatalist，amaterialist，andananarchist。Hisonlyremedyistoabolishthepoor-rates，andstarvethepoorintocelibacy。Thefollyandwickednessofthebookhaveprovokedhim，headmits，tocontemptuousindignation；
　　andMalthusmaybeagoodmanpersonally。Still，the’farthingcandle’
　　ofMalthus’sfameasapoliticalphilosophermustsoongoout。SointheQuarterlyReviewSoutheyattributesthesocialevilstothedisintegratingeffectofthemanufacturingsystem，ofwhichAdamSmithwasthe’tediousandhard-hearted’prophet。TheexcellentMalthusindeedbecomesthe’hard-hearted’almostasHookerwasthe’judicious。’thissufficientlyrepresentstheviewofthesentimentalTory。Malthus，transformedintoamonster，deservesthe’execrations’noticedbyChalmers。ThereisathoroughcoincidencebetweenthisviewandthatofthesentimentalRadicals。SoutheyobservesthatMalthusasinterpretedbyhimdoesnotreallyanswerGodwin。