New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-04-05

and the rate OF increase wiz Cfuuubu.
The tendency Of wages to fall with the growth
of populsioa il the very essence, the worst prsc-
teal dogma, Of the system be pretends to discard
and assumes to rsfute II is impossible otherwise
than by its aid to make the show Of an argument
for any such tendency. The facts Of history sbun-
dantly repe it % an empirical conclusion, and the
real American system Of Political Economy, which
Mr.. Bowen has never heard Of, establishes law
directly the contrary. 1t proves from incontro-
vertible laws of vegetable chemistry and physiol-
ogy that increasing density Of population promotes
the relative increase not only Of wealth generally,
bat specifically of food and raw materials; and is
also proves that not only does production in the
normal course Of nature grow more rapidly than
populatiOp but that Of the increased mas of pro-
ducts-as it would be if they were equally divided
tn increasing proportion is won By the lsborer
for wages. Contrast the last quoted passage from
Mr. Bowen with the following;
Whatever tends to keep men hopele.sly poor is a
direct encours gement-the strongestof al incentives
10 an increase Of population. Ii Il not the
excers of population which causes the misery but the
misery which causes the excess of population.
Perhaps he can establish distinction between
low as.s, " hch are to diminish the rate of Amer
lean increase, ard misery, which would accelerate
it. If not, his argument is humiliating example
OF the shifts to which man is driven by the sham
Of rejecting theory while 6dhering to the mode Of
reasoning and the mOst vital consequences which
sttend it. The growth Of population promotes
greater relative growth Of subsistence produces
a diminshing relative growth or the phenomens
~
must be true; but Mr.. Bowen's pupils will find it
very hard to discover which of them, if either he
really believes.
Mr.. Bowen's treatment Of the subject OF rent or
the value of land ia unsatisfactory, though no. per-
hans TO the same extent as his discussion of the
topic of population. He very correctly mant sins
"that the natural fertility of what Ricardo calls
the original and inherent powers of the soil as an
element of rent are wholly Insignificant in compsr-
ison with nearness to market" He treats it, how
ever, empricaly without seeking the ultimate law
ON which the fact rests, and therefore without
determining the degree of its importance and the
limits within which the observation holds good, or
producing that clear conviction which can only
flow from understanding the reason Of rule. Ho
holds that 80 much of Ricardos doctrine /" that
land bears rent in proportion to It's nearness to the
place where agricultural produce is needed and
consumed and that the increase of population ia
on evil because the community are obliged to sand
further and further off for their supplies il obvi-
ously fallacous, as involving the suppOstOn /" that
the population as it increases remains stationary or
on the same spot so that the grain must be brought
to it at price enhanced BY the cost of Transports
tion." His answer is that {" instead Of The food
coming from distance TO the population, the pop"a-
lion 90 TO lie food" The italics are his own. We
do not see that this helps the matter very much,
for, waving the question whether the statement OF
RcardO's difficulty is a correct one, the objection
remains that at the place to which they may re-
move the same amount of food is to be obtained
only BY the expenditure of labor greater to some
extent large or email; and that with the progress
of population all such places will be found already
occupied Mr.. Bowen, however, states theory
of rent to which our objection is, not that it is
rot sound so far it coca, but that 1t IS incom-
plete; that be Las not adequately proved it, aud
that it is continually set forth and supported IN
terms which relate TO price or money VALUATION
and not to the quantity of the products and their
cost in labor This is, that ait arises from the e1.
cess of the local demand over the local supply, and
il therefore ultimately regusted by the expense
and inconvenience of bringing food from distance,
or by the discomforts and priyations which attend
the removal of portion of the people to new
home" This becomes very simple when we reverse
the hypothesis Of Ricardo, "a is done by the true
American system of Political Economy, and subst-
tute the fact that men compelled BY their weak
ness to begin with the cultivation of the poor soils
and pass, with the acquisition OF power through the
increase Of population and of associated effort to
the richer The doctrine gains as much in effective
ness as it does in facility and cOgency of demonstra
ton. Dir. Bowen applies his doctrine to the sup.
port of the policy of protection, and thus 6 YES
practical utility TO his difference with Ricardo but
with vastly less force than the acceptance of the
complete truth would have given him. The grand
prevailing imperfection of lis book ia that it is
throughout nt gsuve and critical merely, not con-
structiye. He has added nothing to the European
system. and has eliminated its error but very par
TALLY and feebly.
In discussing pronts lie Iahs I" distinguish De-
tween rate and quantity, and tells us that "a d.
mini.hed rate Of profit tends to throw the grea;
branches of manufacture and commerce exclu-
sivey into the hands OF large capitalists, and thus
to increase that inequality in the distribution OF
wealth which was one of the original causes OF a
fall of profits" The American school proves
mott conclusive!y that the declension of the
rat. of profit attends and accelerates increasing
tsxalfy in the distribution of wealth but that the