Malthusarguesthat’perfectibility’givesanimpossibleendbecauseequalitywouldleadtoviceandmisery。ButwhyshouldwenotsupposewithGodwinachangeofcharacterwhichwouldimplyprudenceandchastity?Menastheyaremaybeincapableofequalitybecausetheyhavebrutalpassions。Butmenastheyaretobemayceasetobebrutalandbecomecapableofequality。
　　This，indeed，representsaseriouscriticism。WhatMalthuswasreallyconcernedtoprovewasthatthesocialstateandthecorrespondingcharactersupposeeachother；andthatrealimprovementsupposesthattheindividualmustsomehowacquiretheinstinctsappropriatetoanimprovedstate。Thedifferencebetweenhimandhisopponentswasthatheemphasisedthemischiefoflegislation，suchasthatembodiedinthepoor-law，whichcontemplatedaforciblechange，destroyingpovertywithoutraisingthepoorman’scharacter。Suchariserequiredalonganddifficultelaboration，andhethereforedwellsmainlyuponthefollyofthelegislative，unsupportedbythemoral，remedy。ToGodwin，ontheotherhand，whoprofessedanunlimitedfaithinthepowerofreason，thisdifficultywascomparativelyunimportant。Removepoliticalinequalitiesandmenwillspontaneouslybecomevirtuousandprudent。
　　Godwinaccordingly，whenansweringDr。ParrandMackintosh，36in1801，welcomedMalthus’sfirstversionoftheessay。Hedeclaresittobeas’unquestionableanEditiontothetheoryofpoliticaleconomy’ashasbeenmadebyanywriterforacenturypast’；and’admitstheratiostotheirfullextent。’37Inthisphilosophicalspiritheproceedstodrawsomeratherstartlingconclusions。Hehopesthat，asmankindimproves，suchpracticesasinfanticidewillnotbenecessity；butheremarksthatitwouldbehappierforachildtoperishininfancythantospendseventyyearsinviceandmisery。38HereferstotheinhabitantsofCeylonasaprecedentforencouragingotherpracticesrestrictiveofpopulation。Inshort，thoughhehopesthatsuchmeasuresmaybeneedless，hedoesnotshrinkfromadmittingtheirpossiblenecessity。Sofar，then，GodwinandMalthusmightformanalliance。Equalitymightbethegoalofboth；andbothmightadmitthenecessityofchangeincharacteraswellasinthepoliticalframework；onlythatMalthuswouldlaymorestressupontheeviloflegislativechangesoutrunningorindependentofmoralchange。Here，however，arosetherealoffence。Malthushadinsisteduponthenecessityofself-help。Hehadridiculedthepretensionsofgovernmenttofixtherateofwages；andhadshownhowthepoor-lawsdefeatedtheirownobjects。ThiswasthereallyoffensivegroundtothepoliticalRadicals。
　　Theyhadbeeninthehabitoftracingallevilstotheselfishnessandrapacityoftherulers；pensions，sinecures，publicdebts，hugearmies，profligateluxuriesofallkinds，werethefruitsofbadgovernmentandthetruecausesofpoverty。Kingsandpriestsweretheharpieswhohadsettleduponmankind，andwereruiningtheirhappiness。Malthus，theythought，wasinsinuatingabaseapologyforrulerswhenheattributedtheeviltothecharacterofthesubjectsinsteadofattributingittothewickednessoftheirrulers。HewasasbadastheoldTory，Johnson，39exclaiming：——
　　’HowsmallofallthathumanheartsendureThatpartwhichkingsandlawscancauseorcure！’
　　Hewas，theyheld，tellingthetyrantsthatitwasnottheirfaultifthepoorweremiserable。Theessaywasthusallapologyfortheheartlessnessoftherich。ThisviewwassetforthbyHazlittinanattackuponMalthusin1807。40ItappearsagainintheEnquirybyG。Ensor1769-1843——avivaciousthoughratherlongwindedIrishman，whowasknownbothtoO’ConnellandtoBentham。41GodwinhimselfwasrousedbytheappearanceofthefiftheditionofMalthus’sEssaytowriteareply，whichappearedin1820。HewashelpedbyDavidBooth1766-1846，42amanofsomemathematicalandstatisticalknowledge。Hazlitt’sperformanceissufficientlysignificantofthegeneraltendency。HazlitthadbeenanenthusiasticadmirerofGodwin，andretainedasmuchoftheenthusiasmashiswaywardprejudiceswouldallow。HewasthroughlifewhatmaybecalledasentimentalRadical，sofarasRadicalismwascompatiblewithanardentworshipofNapoleon。
　　TohimNapoleonmeanttheenemyofPittandLiverpoolandCastlereaghandtheHolyAlliance。Hazlittcouldforgiveanypolicywhichmeantthehumiliationofthemenwhomhemostheartilyhated。HisattackuponMalthuswassuchasmightsatisfyevenCobbett，whosecapacityforhatred，andespeciallyforthisparticularobjectofhatred，wasequaltoHazlitt’s。ThepersonalrancourofwhichHazlittwasunfortunatelycapableleadstomonstrousimputations。
　　NotonlydoesMalthus’sessayshowthe’littlelowranklingmaliceofaparishbeadle……disguisedinthegarbofphilosophy，’andbury’falselogic’under’aheapofgarbledcalculations，’43andsoforth；
　　buthefoundsinsinuationsuponMalthus’sargumentastotheconstancyofthesexualpassion。Malthus，hefullybelieves，hasnoneoftheordinarypassions，anger，pride，avarice，orthelike，butdeclaresthathemustbeaslavetoan’amorouscomplexion，’andbelieveallothermentobemade，ofthesamecombustiblematerials。’44ThisfoulblowistoocharacteristicofHazlitt’susualmethod；butindicatesalsothetonewhichcouldbetakenbycontemporaryjournalism。
　　ThemoreseriousargumentisreallythatthesecondversionofMalthusisananswertohisfirst。
　　Briefly，the’moralcheck’whichcameinonlyasakindofafterthoughtisanormalpartoftheprocessbywhichpopulationiskeptwithinlimits，andpreventsthemonstrousresultsofthe’geometricalratio。’Hazlitt，afterinsistinguponthis，admitsthatthereisnothingin，thegeneralprinciplesherestatedthatMr。Malthusisatpresentdisposedtodeny，orthathehasnothimselfexpresslyinsisteduponinsomepartorotherofhisvariousworks。’45HeonlyarguesthatMalthus’sconcessionsaremadeatthecostofself-contradiction。Whythen，itmaybeasked，shouldnotHazlitttakethepositionofanimproverandharmoniserofthedoctrineratherthanofafierceopponent?Theanswerhasbeenalreadyimplied。HeregardsMalthusasanapologistforanunjustinequality。Malthus，hesays，inclassifyingtheevilsoflife，has’allottedtothepoorallthemisery，andtotherichasmuchviceastheyplease。’46Thecheckofstarvationwillkeepdownthenumbersofthepoor；andthecheckofluxuryandprofligacywillrestrainthemultiplicationoftherich，’thepooraretomakeaformalsurrenderoftheirrighttoprovokecharityorparishassistancethattherichmaybeabletolayoutalltheirmoneyontheirvices，’47Themiseryofthelowerordersistheresultofthepoweroftheupper。Amanbornintoaworldwhereheisnotwantedhasnoright，saidMalthus，toashareofthefood，thatmightbetrueifthepoorwereasetoflazysupernumerarieslivingontheindustrious，Butthetruthisthatthepoormandoesthework，andisforcedtoputupinreturnwithapartoftheproduceofhislabour，48Thepoor-lawsrecognisetheprinciplethatthosewhogetallfromthelabourofothersshouldprovidefromtheirsuperfluitiesforthenecessitiesofthoseinwant。49The’grindingnecessity’ofwhichMalthushadspokendoesnotraisebutlowerthestandard；andasystemofequalitywouldlesseninsteadofincreasingthepressure。Malthus，again，hasproposedthatparentsshouldberesponsiblefortheirchildren。Thatis，saysHazlitt，Malthuswouldleavechildrentostarvation，thoughheprofessestodisapproveinfanticide。Hewould’extinguisheverysparkofhumanity……towardsthechildrenofothers’onpretenceofpreservingthe’tiesofparentalaffection。’
　　Malthustriestoarguethatthe’iniquityofgovernment’isnotthecauseofpoverty。Thatbelief，hesays，hasgenerateddiscontentandrevolution。
　　Thatis，saysHazlitt，thewaytopreventrevolutionsandproducereformsistopersuadepeoplethatalltheevilswhichgovernmentmayinflictaretheirownfault。Governmentistodoasmuchmischiefasitpleases，withoutbeinganswerableforit。50Thepoor-laws，asHazlittadmits，arebad，butdonotshowtherootoftheevil，theevilsarereallyduetoincreasingtyranny，dependence，indolence，andunhappinessduetoothercauses，Pauperismhasincreasedbecausethegovernmentandtherichhavehadtheirwayineverything。Theyhavesquanderedourrevenues，multipliedsinecuresandpensions，doubledsalaries，givenmonopoliesandencouragedjobs，anddepressedthepoorandindustrious，the’poorcreatetheirownfund，’andthenecessityforithasarisenfromtheexorbitantdemandsmadebytherich，51MalthusisaBlifil，52hypocriticallyinsinuatingargumentsinfavouroftyrannyunderpretenceofbenevolence。
　　Hazlitt’swriting，althoughshowingthepassionsofabitterpartisan，hitssomeofMalthus’srathercloudyargumentation。Hissuccessor，Ensor，representingthesameview，findsanappropriatetopicinthewrongsofIreland。Irishpoverty，heholds，isplainlyduenottoover-populationbuttounder-government，53meaning，wemustsuppose，misgovernment。Butthesamecauseexplainsothercases。The’peoplearepoorandaregrowingpoorer，’54andthereisnomysteryaboutit。Theexpenseofacourt，thewasteoftheprofitsandmoneyintheHouseofCommons，factswhichareinstrikingcontrasttotherepublicanvirtuesoftheUnitedStates，areenoughtoaccountforeverything；andMalthus’swholeaimisto’calumniatethepeople。’Godwinin1820takesupthesametaunts，Malthusought，hethinks，towelcomewar，famine，pestilence，andthegallows。55Hehastaughtthepoorthattheyhavenoclaimtorelief，andtherichthat，byindulginginvice，theyareconferringabenefituponthecountry。Thepoor-lawsadmitaright，andhetauntsMalthusforproposingtoabolishit，andrefusingfoodtoapoormanonthegroundthathehadnoticenottocomeintotheworldtwoyearsbeforehewasborn。56
　　Godwin，whoseearlieratheismhadbeensupersededbyavaguedeism，nowthinkswithCobbettthatthepoorweresupportedbythepietyofthemedievalclergy，whofedthehungryandclothedthenakedfromtheirvastrevenues，whiledoomingthemselvestospareliving。57HeappealstotheauthorityoftheChristianreligion，whichindeedmightbeafairargumentumadhominemagainst’ParsonMalthus。’HedeclaresthatNaturetakesmorecareofherworkthansuchirreverentauthorssuppose，and’doesnotaskouraidtokeepdowntheexcessofpopulation。’58Infact，hedoubtswhetherpopulationincreasesatall。Malthus’swholetheory，hesays，restsuponthecaseofAmerica；andwiththehelpofMr。Boothandsomeveryunsatisfactorystatistics，hetriestoprovethattheincreaseshownintheAmericancensushasbeenentirelyduetoimmigration。MalthussafelydeclinedtotakeanynoticeofaproductionwhichinfactshowsthatGodwinhadlosthisearlyvigour。ThesoundUtilitarian，FrancisPlace，tookupthechallenge，andexplodedsomeofGodwin’sstatistics，HeshowshisRadicalismbyadmittingthatMalthus，towhosegeneralbenevolencehedoesjustice，hadnotspokenofthepoorasonesprunglikehimselffromthepoorwouldnaturallydo；
　　andheacceptsmodesoflimitingthepopulationfromwhichMalthushimselfhadshrunk。Forimprovement，helookschieflytotheabolitionofrestrictivelaws，II。SOCIALISM
　　TheargumentsofHazlittandhisalliesbringusbacktotheSocialistposition。Althoughitwasrepresentedbynowriterofmuchliteraryposition，Owenwasbecomingconspicuous，andsomeofhissympathiserswerealreadylayingdownprinciplesmorefamiliarto-day。Already，inthedaysoftheSixActs，thegovernmentwasalarmedbycertain’SpenceanPhilanthropists。’AccordingtoPlacetheywereaveryfeeblesect，numberingonlyaboutfifty，andperfectlyharmless。TheirprophetwasapoormancalledThomasSpence1750-1815，59whohadstartedasaschoolmaster，andin1775readapaperatNewcastlebeforea’PhilosophicalSociety。’60Heproposedthatthelandineveryvillageshouldbelongtoalltheinhabitants——aproposalwhichMr。HyndmanregardsasaprophecyofmorethoroughgoingschemesofLandNationalisation。