Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-03-27

provided for than smaller. assert that the
| injustice of society, not the niggardliness OF
| nature, is the cause of the want and misery
which the current theory attributes to over
population. / assert that the new mouths
which an increasing population calls into ex-
| istence require no more food than the old
ones, while the hands they bring with them
can in the natural order of things produce
more. 1 assert that, other things being equal.
the greater the population, the greater the
| comfort which an equitable distribution OF
wealth would give to each individual. l as
sert that in state of equality the natural
increase of population would constantly tend
to make every individual richer instead Of
| NIT the question to the test of facts.
Surely, nothing could be fairer than this
mode of stating and meeting the Malthu-
sian doctrine.
have spoken of these things because
they touch a point of literary honor on
which every writer should be sensitive.
But, in reality, they in no wise touch the
constructive reasonings of my book. The
object of that book is not to point out the
inconsistencies and absurdities of previous
/
writers, nor to weigh or number opinions !;
but to seek the solution of great prob
lem. If 1 have called in question
the theories of others, it is mere
ly that they represent widespread
ideas of which it was necessary
to dispose in order to secure attention for
the investigations which follow; and
| whether my statements of these theories
are good or bad in no wise affects the the
ory which have endeavored to establish.
The facts from which my conclusions are
drawn are not facts which can only be
verified by search through libraries, but
facts of common consciousness, of which
every reader, learned or unlearned, is the
sufficient Judge. The fact from which l
have worked out the laws of distribution
Is simply the fact that men seek to crafty
their desires with the least exertion, and
the additional facts from which the demon
stration of the effects of material progress
proceeds are merely that the material of
wealth must be drawn from land, that
human desires increase with the capacity
for gratifying them, and that continuous
increase in the value of a thing Of limited
quantity begets confident expectation OF
future increase. As to whether these are
facts or not, each reader can safely judge
for himself, just as he can judge whether
the reasoning from them is or is not valid.
And so, too, it seems to me, that the
proposition that the tendency of material
progress is to the depression of the lowest
class and to an increasing inequality in the
distribution of wealth, needs no further
demonstration that have given it by call
ing attention to well-known facts. The
fact that as new societies approximate to
the condition of older communities so does
poverty deepen and the condition OF the
lowest class become harder and more hope
less the fact that it is in the centers OF
population and wealth, where productive
power is at. it's highest, that there is the
most squalid misery; the fact that it is
from the older to the newer countries
that is to say, from those further to those
less advanced in the scale of material pro-
gress-that labor flows for higher wages
and better opportunities. Surely you
would not have me attempt to prove these
facts They are recognized in common
thought and speech and action; by the
rich as by the poor; by the conservative
as by the radical by the Ignorant as by
the educated. Macaulay recognized them
when he warned us that democracy was
vet on its trial when he warned us that
in the next century, if not in this, the day
will come when in our States +" multi
tude of people, none of whom has had
more than half breakfast or expects to
have half dinner, will elect Legisla-
ture :" and all political economists recog-
nize them and endeavor to account for
them by the elaborate theories which l
have essayed to overthrow.
That the course of modern civilization
has been towards the amelioration of the
condition of the masses of mankind that
even during the present century the aver
age of comfort, leisure and refinement has
been greatly raised, l do not dispute
the contrary, l expressly admit it. But |
doubt if the condition of the lowest class
has anywhere been improved; for when
the lowest class is just on the verge OF
starvation l cannot see how it could ever
have occupied lower status. And doubt,
as John Stuart Mill doubted, whether
there is any improvement in the con-
dition of the working classes which can be
credited to increased productive power.
Yet, after all, the real question IS not
whether there has or has not been improve
ment, but whether the improvement is
such as should have resulted from the po-
litical, intellectual and material progress
thathas gone on; not SO much as to the meas
ure of what has SO far been accomplished,
as to the direction of present tendencies.
Certainly the enormous advances in labor
saving machinery and in all the processes
of production in no wise seem to make it
easier for the laborer to get living; but
seem rather to tend in the other direction |;
certainly wages las a proportion if not as a
quantity are steadily growing less every
day; certainly the inequality in the distri-
button of wealth is steadily becoming
greater.
You say that similar disparity exists
between the physical endowments and ca
pacities of men and that such disparities
between rich and poor have always been.
How many pairs of pen can you pick out
among thousand, one of whom will be
twice as tall as the other? Did you ever
see or hear of any man who was ten times