Current:

Leader (1850-1860), 24th May 1851, Edition Town of 2, Page 496, Untitled Article

Page 496
Page 20
20 of 24

On this page

  • Text (4)
  • Transcript

    • Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.

      Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.

      Untitled Article

      the number of our sheep and oxen , we take bo much corn land and so much building room from man , to convert into ' pasture land and standing room for cattle . 4 . Instead of having recourse to metaphysical arguments and theological standards of right and wrong , let us observe how the instinct of population acts when reason never interferes with the process . " Wherever there is liberty , the power of increase is exerted ; and the superabundant effects are repressed " afterwards by want of Toom and nourishment . " In a crowded plantation the trees are stunted in their growth and die . In a garden , seed too thickly sown springs tip only that one half of the crop may destroy the other half . In the insect world an excess of life is attended by a countervailing destruction . " The race of plants and the race of animals shrink under this great restrictive law . "

      5 . There is no way in which man can evade it ; at least no method of evasion has yet been discovered ; and till it is discovered , the " barbarous checks of fire , famine , and slaughter" will not cease to operate . Men will live in vice and misery ; children will die young , or be " dragged up" in squalor and criminal ignorance ; women will be the victims of the tyranny and passion of man . Prostitution will be the necessary consequences of a condition , in which subsistence is below population , while appetite is uncontrolled by intellect and self-denying love .

      6 . There is only one method of meeting the evil . To keep population down to a level with subsistence . And this can only be done by subordinating instinct to reason . Until man can learn to be virtuous , he cannot be free ; until he can practise self-control , he cannot be happy . The progress which the human race has made , justifies us in entertaining the belief that it will make still greater progress . Yet it is Visionary to expect that men without discipline , without self-knowledge , without clear perception of duty and sympathy with humanity , will voluntarily submit to the continued practice of any moral obligation . Only benefits of the most palpable character , only hopes

      that , invite , coupled with fears that compel , can actuate those who are necessarily and excusably the slaves of sensation . Happily , however , it is in the power of society to try the only remedy which can be suggested . A large margin of subsistence yet awaits us . The extinction of poverty for a whole generation , and the introduction of social reform , will give us ample room and verge enough . For awhile subsistence may even outstrip population , and opportunity will thus be afforded for the diffusion of these scientific truths , which should be the heritage of all men . This difficult problem will then be universally appreciated , and when population again overtakes

      subsistence it may receive a proximate solution . Distinctions will of course be recognized . Those who are able to lead a celibate life may be encouraged to do so . Those , on the other hand , in whose case the disastrous consequences of improvident marriage form the preferable alternative , must be left free to follow their own inclination . It should be remembered that at the utmost matrimony need never be precluded , but only deferred . There can be no doubt that with the general progress ^ f mankind , the voluntary restraint upon population will be brought into ncti < m . Experience shows that the elevation of the standard

      of living , the development of intellectual and moral wants , the possession of property , and the diffusion of education , unquestionably act as limiting forces . If , indeed , Mr . Newman be correct in his statement that the offspring of late marriages is more numerous than that of early marriages , it is evident that the simple i > ostponemeiit of matrimony will not furnish a remedy . Stiitistic . il information on this subject is still a desideratum . Supposing Mr . Newman ' s statement to be correct , we must conclude that no parent should allow his family contingent to exceed that number for which in the normal state of society he

      would be able to make suitable provision . 7 . I admit that while selfish and ignorant Legislation refuses to the majority of men their Roeial rights , it would be ns impolitic , as it would he useless , to preach the doctrine of restraint . 1 have do wish to enlarge the emp ire of Mammon at the expense of my suffering brothers . But when , in enforcing every manVtfuty , society shall proclaim every man ' s right ; when the wealth that science and industry have accumulated , shall be fairly and universally distributed ; when ancient love fihnll return to mellow and brighten the severities of modern law ; then the truth about MulthuM must be told , must be accepted , must be practised . You ™ , &c , M .

      Untitled Article

      TAND AN 1 > NUMBRKS . Itiiiniii ^ liiiiii , May 15 , 1 K . M . Sin , Can you find room in your next paper for one or two comment * upon the article headed " La Terreestaux Lords , " which appeared m your lust ? If you can , you will oblige me . In that article there are two subjects discussed which have very little connection with each other the nationalization of the land , and the population theory of Malthun . You insinuate , rather than state , that the theory of M . tlthufl , if true at all , is true only became land in held ah private property ; and that if it were once nationalized , whatever importance that theory may have had will pans away for ever .

      I am ready to admit as fully as you , or any of your correspondents can do , that land can never become private property in the absolute manner that any other commodity may ; that the grand title to property of all sorts , the right of the producer to what he has produced , fails when applied to land ; and in addition to this , that the very existence of the community depending upon a right use being made of its land . The community must necessarily have the right to reserve ( or perhaps it would be more correct to say take possession of ) this common fund , from which every member is directly or indirectly

      maintained , whenever it shall be clearly proved to be the general interest to do so . The only question then to be determined is , under which system ; that of admitting private property in land , or of nationalizing it , the greater amount of physical and moral good would accrue to the community . This is the question to which those of your correspondents who take an interest in this subject should confine themselves , and on which at some future time I shall be happy to make a few remarks ; but my present object is to show that , under the present system , as well as under the existing one , the population doctrine would

      hold true . . Let us suppose the land nationalized , and the State the sole landlord . As I presume there are few , if any , who would wish the Government to add production to its other functions , I assume that the land would be let to individuals as it is at present , and as this Government would not be gifted with any hig her kind of knowledge than previous ones , I assume , too , that the amount of rent paid by each

      tenant would be decided as it is now by competition . And , therefore , that the rent paid to the new landlord would be just what was paid to the old ; and , consequently , that all the members of the community who are unable to compete now , would be equally incompetent to compete then . In fact , that the great mass of the people would be as effectually debarred from the land under the proposed system as they are under the existing one ; and , therefore , that if Malthus ' s theory was true in his time , it will hold

      true in time to come . But , in fact , if every man in the community had his piece of land , the populator ' s theory would even then be just as true as ever it was ; the tendency to increase beyond the increase in-the means of sustenance would be as strong as ever ; and it is precisely in those parts of the world where the land is held by those who labour in it , that this tendency is kept down by foresight instead of starvation . To all who deny the tendency of organised lite to increase beyond

      the means of subsistence , 1 would ask are there any other limits to the increase of any species of animal except the difficulty of procuring the food necessary to its existence , and its liability to be preyed upon by other species ? If there are any other limits , what are they ? If there are not , in what way does men differ from other animals in this respect , except that by foresight and prudence he can provide for his offspring before he increases und multiplies , instead of nfr . eT or not at all .

      In your article " La Torre est aux Lords , you were singularly unfortunate both in your illustration and your authority . You say , " Man alone is poor , the sheep gets all he nibbles . " But man , too , gets all he nibbles ; and do you mean to say that slice ]) never yet died of hunger ? If they ever have so died , what does the sentence mean ? When you quote Him who said , " Take no thought for the morrow what ye shall eat , or wherewithal ye shall be clothed , " you should remember that this command to His followers was joined to a promise that all their wants should be provided for . When you can make to the mass of our population a similar promise , and fulfill it , you , too , may cry aloud to them , " Take no thought for the morrow , " without committing sin . Then , and not till then . I remain . Sir , your obedient servant , E . It .

      Untitled Article

      MAI / l'IIUS AMONO TMH SUEUI . May 20 , 1 S 51 . Sin , —Allow me to ask you one or two questions with reference to your artiele of the 10 th of May on Malthusianism . You nay that , according to the received Malthusian theory , it is tlie poor man , or , as you call him , I ' oormtin ( meaning , no doubt , to show that you are speaking of a class ) , who in to be diligent , orderly , and in - duHtrioiiH , and tliat he is to leave the " affections ' ' to the well-to-do Classen . 1 would auk—is it a maxim with the well-to-do classes , who art ; imbued with the Malthusian theory , to inculcate the ulmoHt and earliest multiplication among themselves ? Are the actual restraints upon increase in the higher classes oilier jn kind or less severe than those which they desire to impost ) upon the poorer ? You nay , "The sheep has . all the nibbles , and the lamb is born without thought of the morrow . " It strikes mi ! that this may be predicated of human creatures without , implying uny great felicity . The Irishman undoubtedly has all he munchcH , and the Irish infant is born without any very effective thought of the morrow . Hut ns you nocui to present thia a « an ideal picture , I would u » k—Arc you speaking of

      the sheep on a fawn , or of the sheep in ^« ab ^ gmal condition ? If of the former , do you consider the law o ? increase that is enforced in the slave-breeding states of America as the truest expression of the Divine will on this point i If of the latter , » it oy " competition , " or otherwise , that the multiplication of numbers is checked ? la other words , are you desirous of substituting for free obedience to moral law the total 8 ubjugation of the servile state , or the rude corrections of the savage state ? -L » - ^ "' -. * * ' . •_ \ . i— nVkAVirfiii

      Untitled Article

      CHURCHES DEGENERATE . London , May 6 , 1851 . Sir , —The Eeverend Mr . Larken has regarded with compassion the fiery immolation of the Leader , while he has beheld with a frown the " wet blanket of Terrs Filius . This circumstance is to be regretted . Meekness , demureness , and soft words , when applied to what is wilfully erroneous and false , degenerate into mawkish complaisancy , unprincipled conciliation , and at last into absolute hypocrisy . It would appear that reprobation , rebuke , ana every kind of antagonism are not found within the sphere of Mr . Larken ' s mental constitution . This is very singular ! Why are they not ? They formed an essential part of his great master s being . Where does literature supply terms of deeper contumely than were applied by the prince of philosophers to a people denounced and repudiated , as " of their father the Devil" &c f

      , But Mr . Larken is horrified in a still greater degree at a sweeping condemnation of his whole order . No doubt he is . So also would have been the collective body of the Mosaic priesthood , when stepping forth in the form of godliness , and with the language of order and decorum in their mouths , they paid money to Judas to take the life of one whose bold assault upon their principles threatened with ruin the " tithe question , ' ' as well as their secular preeminence . And yet , while so engaged , they would doubtless have repudiated , as " mistaken zeal and offended prejudice , " the imputation of universal

      error , pointing to the grand doctrine of Apostolic succession through Aaron and Moses up even to God himself ! They would also , with characteristic modesty , have quoted and appropriated all the virtuous acts of their progenitors , exclaiming , " by-whom was civilization fostered and learning kept alive , but by the priesthood ? Who have stood between the noble and the vassal , the monarch and the people , the oppressor and the victim , and enforced the =-decrees of equity , but the priesthood ? " And then , too , while the people were starving and the priesthood rolling in luxury , how complaisantly and triumphantly they would have added , " who are contending more

      manfully and generously , " in our way ( sops to Cerberus ) , for the rights of the poor ( skilly nouiitur ) and the establishment of just relations between man and man — that is , between man and woman , in regard to the separation of the husband and the wife in the workhouse . But Mr . Larken does not contemplate the possibility of an universally corrupt priesthood , especially in the Christian body ; and yet he might have done so with propriety , seeing that the Saviour pointed out a period when Christianity should become a " dry " tree , and that ( when for the purpose of as » ain rescuing the world from destruction the Son of Man should appear ) he would not " find faith upon the earth . "

      The practice of fostering evil and falsehood by blinking at both ; the cry of " Peace , peace , where there is no peace , " will never do in an enlightened age , when , at ) is witnessed in the downfal of existing Christian dynasties , and the general distress of nations , God is come to judge the earth . Conscience , that makes cowards of all the children of this world , will superinduce , ns , indeed , it is already doing , a policy of mock forbearance , mutual flattery , and cautious interference . The *• loaves and fishes are in

      danger ; ' the tithe question and secular preeminence ( on the part of the ministers of one who " had not where to lay his head ") are again mooted as of old . Hush ! keep quiet ; don ' t move , my dear fellows ; never think for yourselves ; eat ( skilly and pick oakum , while we , your " pastors and masters , " will bum the Leader and look afcer the loaves and lishea . Sueli is very naturall y the language of those who perceive their heaven and earth pausing away , find yet , what is more terrible still , the word of God

      remaining . lias Mr . Larken , while deprecating interference and collision of whatsoever kind , never reflected upon the fact that every regenerate man is a microcosm ? Hut if each regenerate man is a microcosm , ho was created , like the material cosmos , out of chaos . Therefore it wau that darkness wuh on the abysn of hi « external being . Hut , in due course . God said let there be light , and what was the consequence ? The

      li ht by its inherent virtue repudiated , scorned , scattered , and expelled the darkness . Now , if the doctrine of repudiation , reprobation , rebuke , and antagonism is manifested in each regenerate being iih a microcosm , must it not be manifest also in a combination of beingft , or microcosm , such as is represented by the Leader T Had the advocates of the . Leader hue ** silent when its pages were burned by an antagonistic power before a helpleBB multitude , their » ilen o « might

      Untitled Article

      496 Ctt *««»«*? P **™** . 1 . i -

  • Citation
    • Leader (1850-1860), May 24, 1851, page 496, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse-os.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1884/page/20/