Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1863-11-17
The Doctrine of Nautilus.

there, WAS natural tendency to an IN
crease of population in every country
which the productions of the earth could
not-support." The author, like many
others, is very much afraid that science
may In some wav be found to conflict
With. the teachings of the bible All
truth must be consistent, and hence ri ht
interpretations of the revelations of sci
ence can by no possibility conflict with
a right Interpretation Of tho revealed
word. But it is ever to be kept in mind
that both are to be interpreted by the
same fallible human reason. Those
who are continually in fear lest science
may infringe upon the facts OF Theology
have, we fear, not too much faith in the
validity of their creed, ana certainly if
mere authority in interpretations to be
relied upon, without any attempt to con
flute the errors of science, or to prove its
consistency with divine truth, its prog
ress will still illustrate the truth of a
written revelation, which is one of its
ends A contrary course will do almost
as much, to impede the progress ofchris-
tianity as the sophisms Of infdelity.
Theology has more than once very
wisely and very ,hilosophically correct
ed its interpretations Of Scripture under
the light of scientific discoveries. How
many intelligent men now believe that
the days spoken of in the Mosaic ac-
count of creation correspond to our nat
ural DAYS Of twenty-four hours +! Why
may not truth from one source as well
| illustrate the truth Of revelation as from
another? The author seems to think,
because, in the first age Of the world,
God commanded Noah and his sons to
ssincrease and multiply and replenish
the EARTH that therefore the command
cannot be fulfilled until the population
is increased to its utmost limit.
Have not men increased and multi
piled, and is not the earth replenishcd
now? Was it intended that a precise
and definite Specification as to numbers
should be given to the words "iucrease
and multiply and replenish the earth -
IF it were not for the causes which re-
move men from the earth, as war, pes
thence, famine and accident, how many
inhabitants would now be upon the
earth And if God permits these eau
ses to conflict with the command tor
ssreplenishing the Earth" is there any
Inconsistency in his permitting the I'M
poverishment OF the race, owing to an
excess of population in any country,
from producing like results!
That the population of some densely
peopled areas is now kept down in i
considerable degree by the poverty OF
the lowest classes and w-nt of tie
proper amount of wholesome food, and
that many children die every year from
want is a fact too we'll known to need
comment. If it be objected that the
necessary amount Of food exists, but is
not properly distributed, (although that
view does not at all affect the practical
question: it may still be answered that
such distribution would only be a ten.
porary remedy; it would give an i'm
petus to population, would consume the
surplus, diminish production, and final
II increase ten-fold the evil sought tc
be remedied. The very increase ofpop
ulation after reaching certain limit il
the originating, if not the proximate,
cause Of more deaths, perhaps, than oc
cur from all other independent causes
combined.
!, In the first three years after 1920, the
increase in the population Of Prussia
which after the peace of 1915 increased
more rapi lily than in any other Europe
) an country-amounted to 900, 900 souls
but for the three years subsequent tc
1882 it amounted only to one-half OF
: 100000 souls, and this, too, according
, to M. Hoffman without the appearance
of any particular disease which out
stripped the rest. The harvests in these
years were about the az rage, and sucf
a result can only be attributed to a de
terioration in the condition of the bod,
of the people from a too rapid increase
of the population.
1t must be observed too that it i. the
practical question about which Politi
/, ca! Economists choose to interest them
5 selves, the. effects uron national welfare
Il At the same time, if it be admitted tina
t any particular area can produce great
err population Ian it can support-leav
ing out, as in the argument we must il
> fairness do, the decrease in population
: from want of the requisite amount o
wholesome food-then we think it mus
: be conceded that as a final result OF
any scale, the tendency is for population
to outstrip production. Nor is it nee
essary for the people Of a country to be
brought to the point of starvation tt
make good the theory.
If, in any series Of years in any coun
try, the average amount of food to the
individual is decreasing, it is certainly
owing to the fact that population is in
creasing more rapidly than production
If the prolificacy Of the race is such {
great virtue in the estimation of our cor
. respondent, as tending to fulfill a coul-
mand of God, it is hardly possible tina
: in the divine constitution of things, 81
painful a remedy as decrease of pop
ulation from exposure to want, would b.
) found as an existent fact. We shoule
have looked for a reward, instead of {
penalty, which is, indeed, the real char
acter Of the remedy. If the position o
our correspondent be true, it would be
well if there were rewards offered for ;
maximum number of descendants in {
t minimum time. Those who have {
! Al i I 4