Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-04-23 00:00:00

ACT AGAINST THE ERECTION OF COTTAGE, :4 DURING
THE REIGN OF ELIZABETH.—ALARM A.BOUT THE
INCREASE OF THE METROPOLIS.—EXCE'SS OF POPE-
LATION.—THE THEORY OF MALTHUS REVIEWED.
PE iTILENCE.—COMPARISON OF THE ELIZABETHEAN
AGE WITH THE PRESENT.
The statesmen of Elizabeth's reign seem to have
entertained an impression, which extended itself to
succeeding ones, -that population was increasing
faster than the funds for its employment,-and that
. it was necessary to discourage its further augmenta-
tion by legislative measures. For this purpose
urions act was passed, er6tifed An Act against the
Erecting and Maintaining of Cottages, which, after
reciting that "great incorreeniences have been found •
byexperience to grow ley erecting and building of
great numbers and multitudes of cottages, which hre
daily more and more incr eased in many parts of this •
realm," enacts that, for the time to come, no such
tenement shall be erected unless fear acres of land.;
he attached to it. (1.) With a similar view was
the proclamation issiu:d in 1581, forbidding the
erection of new built ings within three miles of
'the city gates, and line sting the number of' inmates
in a house to one famil y. 'And in the year 1630, .in
-the reign of Charles 1., an enactment ,ef a similar
-character was issued, prohibiting houses being built
ou new foundations in London or Westminster or
within three miles on the city or the King's Palace.
This proclamation seise forbade: the receiving of
inmates in houses, which, it was said, would multi-
ply the inhabitants to such an excessive number
that they could neither be governed nor fed !. There
were, however, some judicious regulations connected
with this statute far the prevention of fires:and the
preservation of the health of the' inhabitants. All
new houses, for instance, were ordered to have party
walls and fronts of. brick ; and the windows to be
higher than wide, both fir the admission of a;r, and
for rendering the ipiers between .them more solid
than they would otherwise haVe been. These.
provisions, I need .not say, have been considerably•
enlarged by subsequent statutes, particularly by the •
Sanatory and Baiiding, . Acts, and the enforcing of
-which has so greatly contributed towards the health,
the safety, and the•beauty of all our large towns.
The deterioration in the circumstances of the
people, no less than the public acts, are evidence of,
the increasing pressure of population. Thus, in
1495, a labourer scould purchase with his wages
199 pints- a wheat, .the wages of an agricultural
labourer at this period being is 10d- per week.;
while those -of the domestic artificers, such as brick-,
layers, carpenters, „masons, plumLers, &c., amounted
to 2s 91 per week, or is wheat to 292 pints. In the
year 1593 the former could only purchase eighty-two
pints; the latter 123 pints. And in the year 1610
the former could only purchase forty-six pints; and
the latter sixty-one .pints. So that in the reign of
James I. a labourer could obtain only one-fourth part
of the necessaries .and conveniences which he ob-
tained in the reign of Henry VII. (2.)
It does not require -us, however, to go so far back
as the reign of Elizabeth, to diicover views of a
similar character, which were held by some of our
most eminent statesmen and able political- writers,
respecting this•question of over-population, and the
decrease of employment and its maintenance. Sixty-
one years ago Mr. 'Malthus published his Essay on
the Principle of Population, wherein he enunciated-
these views—first, that there was a tendency in
mankind to increase faster than the means of subsist-
' esice.; and secondly, that this tendency is checked
either by the misery occasioned by deficiency of
food, or by the moral intelligence which controls
the full indulgence of the pro-creative passion when
hurtful to happiness.
But to say the least of this philosophy, it may be
truly observed, that a portion of it is nearly as old
as the creation, and must in fact have been recognised
by the earliest of the human race. The merit,-
however, of showing the practical application of his
principles to the well being of society, by -his
masterly enquiry into the past and present state of
mankind, unquestionably belongs to Mr. Malthus.
In this respect he rendered a service of intestimable
price, and gave a new character to morals and
legislation. Contrary to previously established
maxims, it became manifest that the great merit in
governments and individuals consists, not in aug-
menting the number of people, but the
.means of-
subsistence : if the latter is provided, the former
follows as unfailingly. as harvest does the seed time.
"Had this important doctrine," remarks a writer—
a profound writer on political economy hiniSelfes-
" been set forth less with an air of novelty, and more as
admitted and self-evident truth, as it had been done
by Wallace, Smith, Franklin, Young, and other.
anterior writerse it would not - perhaps -have -ens
countered the severe and lengthened opposition it
has experienced."
Yet, after all, •it may be doubted whether Mr.
Malthus embraced the whole of his science. He
established incontestably the tendency of mankind
to multiply to excess, and its deteriorating conse-
quences ; but he seems. not to have appreciated
sufficiently the operation of another principle of our
nature. The important truth overlooked by the
learned essayist is, that man is a reasoning and self-
loving creature ; and, though there is a natural
tendency in him to increase his number, there is also
a natural tendency to devise expedients for meeting
and controlling its hurtful consequences. The
doctrine of population, therefore, is not as its
philanthropic expounder assumed, irreconcileable
with the doctrine of human improvement ; neither
does it afford any ground for the paralysing inference
that all projects of social amelioration are vain, save
the single one of limiting the multiplication of our
Speeies.
Rousseau, in his Contrat Social, asks, " What is
the most certain sign that the people are maintained
and prosper ?- - It is their number, or, in other words,
their populousness. Do not seek for this sign in
any other quarter. That government, when without
naturalisation's, without extrinsic means, without
colonies, the ' citizens multiply and increase to the
greatest degree, is without doubt the best."
Mirabeau -acquired the title of the " Friend of
Mankind," by laying down the principles, that " it
is their number that constitutes the riches and the
power of empires ;" and another writer, Dr. Price,
treated that proposition as a generally receiv.e.d and
incontrovertible axiom- " Every body knows," says
he, " that the poWer of a State consists in the
• number of its inhabitants; and that in consequence
the encoaragemeat of its population ought to be one
of the first objects of those who administer its
affairs."
Alter all, the error of thes-e eminent individuals
Was rather one of degree and. of circumstance, than
• . of absolute principle. They were wrong in thinking
that the increase of population ever requires encour-
agement; it is sufftment fore the State to provide
subsistence, and the increase of the people .. will
follow as an unfailing circumstance. They were
right in considering men as the riches of a country,
• the end of all legislation and public policy. But
they must surely have intended men that could be
v•odaetivele employed; not -pensioners of a parish,
o
r of the State, who consume without yielding
services in return.
• " Theresis truly
no commodity," remarks a writer
who wrote thirty years ago, at perioda when there
existed great general distress in tis country' "if
so disparaging' an epithet may be applied to nature's
noblest production, so precious as man. Even an
untutored Indian from the plains of Africa
—will fetch hundred pounds in the slave-
markets- of America ; but how much more valu-
able were a eivilLied, instructed, and indefatigable
European ! Yet see how he is depreciated
We give nothing for an .article _with which we' are
already abundant,- supplied, not es en for air or
water, though indispensable to support life, But an

(1.) This ae,ewas not repealed until the reign of George
(2.) Barton on the growing exce*i of population.