4。Wherealabouringclasswhohavenopropertybuttheir
dailywages，andnohopeofacquiringit，refrainfromover—rapid
multiplication，thecause，Ibelieve，hasalwayshithertobeen，
eitheractuallegalrestraint，oracustomofsomesort，which，
withoutintentionontheirpart，insensiblymouldstheconduct，
oraffordsimmediateinducementsnottomarry。Itisnot
generallyknowninhowmanycountriesofEuropedirectlegal
obstaclesareopposedtoimprovidentmarriages。The
communicationsmadetotheoriginalPoorLawCommissionbyour
foreignministersandconsulsindifferentpartsofEurope，
containaconsiderableamountofinformationonthissubject。Mr。
Senior，inhisprefacetothosecommunications，（4*）saysthatin
thecountrieswhichrecognisealegalrighttorelief，"marriage
onthepartofpersonsintheactualreceiptofreliefappearsto
beeverywhereprohibited，andthemarriageofthosewhoarenot
likelytopossessthemeansofindependentsupportisallowedby
veryfew。ThuswearetoldthatinNorwaynoonecanmarry
without’showingtothesatisfactionoftheclergyman，thatheis
permanentlysettledinsuchamannerastoofferafairprospect
thathecanmaintainafamily。’
"InMecklenburg，that’marriagesaredelayedbyconscription
inthetwenty—secondyear，andmilitaryserviceforsixyears;
besides，thepartiesmusthaveadwelling，withoutwhicha
clergymanisnotpermittedtomarrythem。Themenmarryatfrom
twenty—fivetothirty，thewomennotmuchearlier，asbothmust
firstgainbyserviceenoughtoestablishthemselves。’
"InSaxony，that’amanmaynotmarrybeforeheistwenty—one
yearsold，ifliabletoserveinthearmy。InDresden，
professionists（bywhichwordsartizansareprobablymeant）may
notmarryuntiltheybecomemastersintheirtrade。’
"InWurtemburg，that’nomanisallowedtomarrytillhis
twenty—fifthyear，onaccountofhismilitaryduties，unless
permissionbeespeciallyobtainedorpurchased:atthatagehe
mustalsoobtainpermission，whichisgrantedonprovingthathe
andhiswifewouldhavetogethersufficienttomaintainafamily
ortoestablishthemselves;inlargetowns，sayfrom800to1000
florins（from66l。13s。4d。to84l。3s。4d。）;insmaller，from
400to500florins;invillages，200florins（16l。13s。
4d。）’"（5*）
TheministeratMunichsays，"Thegreatcausewhythenumber
ofthepooriskeptsolowinthiscountryarisesfromthe
preventionbylawofmarriagesincasesinwhichitcannotbe
provedthatthepartieshavereasonablemeansofsubsistence;and
thisregulationisinallplacesandatalltimesstrictly
adheredto。Theeffectofaconstantandfirmobservanceofthis
rulehas，itistrue，aconsiderableinfluenceinkeepingdown
thepopulationofBavaria，whichisatpresentlowfortheextent
ofcountry，butithasamostsalutaryeffectinavertingextreme
povertyandconsequentmisery。"（6*）
AtLubeck，"marriagesamongthepooraredelayedbythe
necessityamanisunder，first，ofpreviouslyprovingthatheis
inaregularemploy，work，orprofession，thatwillenablehimto
maintainawife:andsecondly，ofbecomingaburgher，and
equippinghimselfintheuniformoftheburgherguard，which
togethermaycosthimnearly4l。"（7*）AtFrankfort，"the
governmentprescribesnoageformarrying，butthepermissionto
marryisonlygrantedonprovingalivelihood。"（8*）
Theallusion，insomeofthesestatements，tomilitary
duties，pointsoutanindirectobstacletomarriage，interposed
bythelawsofsomecountriesinwhichthereisnodirectlegal
restraint。InPrussia，forinstance，theinstitutionswhich
compeleveryable—bodiedmantoserveforseveralyearsinthe
army，atthetimeoflifeatwhichimprudentmarriagesaremost
likelytotakeplace，areprobablyafullequivalent，ineffect
onpopulation，forthelegalrestrictionsofthesmallerGerman
states。
"Sostrongly，"saysMr。Kay，"dothepeopleofSwitzerland
understandfromexperiencetheexpediencyoftheirsonsand
daughterspostponingthetimeoftheirmarriages，thatthe
councilsofstateoffourorfiveofthemostdemocraticofthe
cantons，elected，beitremembered，byuniversalsuffrage，have
passedlawsbywhichallyoungpersonswhomarrybeforetheyhave
provedtothemagistrateoftheirdistrictthattheyareableto
supportafamily，arerenderedliabletoaheavyfine。In
Lucerne，Argovie，Unterwalden，andIbelieve，St。Gall，Schweitz，
andUri，lawsofthischaracterhavebeeninforceformany
years。"（9*）
5。Wherethereisnogenerallawrestrictiveofmarriage，
thereareoftencustomsequivalenttoit。Whentheguildsor
tradecorporationsoftheMiddleAgeswereinvigour，their
bye—lawsorregulationswereconceivedwithaveryvigilanteye
totheadvantagewhichthetradederivedfromlimiting
competition:andtheymadeitveryeffectuallytheinterestof
artizansnottomarryuntilafterpassingthroughthetwostages
ofapprenticeandjourneyman，andattainingtherankofmaster。
（10*）InNorway，wherethelabourischieflyagricultural，itis
forbiddenbylawtoengageafarm—servantforlessthanayear;
whichwasthegeneralEnglishpracticeuntilthepoor—laws
destroyedit，byenablingthefarmertocasthislabourerson
parishpaywheneverhedidnotimmediatelyrequiretheirlabour。
Inconsequenceofthiscustom，andofitsenforcementbylaw，the
wholeoftheratherlimitedclassofagriculturallabourersin
Norwayhaveanengagementforayearatleast，which，ifthe
partiesarecontentwithoneanother，naturallybecomesa
permanentengagement:henceitisknownineveryneighbourhood
whetherthereis，orislikelytobe，avacancy，andunlessthere
is，ayoungmandoesnotmarry，knowingthathecouldnotobtain
employment。ThecustomstillexistsinCumberlandand
Westmoreland，exceptthatthetermishalfayearinsteadofa
year;andseemstobestillattendedwiththesameconsequences。
Thefarm—servants"arelodgedandboardedintheirmasters’
houses，whichtheyseldomleaveuntil，throughthedeathofsome
relationorneighbour，theysucceedtotheownershiporleaseof
acottagefarm。Whatiscalledsurpluslabourdoesnothere
exist。"（11*）Ihavementionedinanotherchapterthecheckto
populationinEnglandduringthelastcentury，fromthe
difficultyofobtainingaseparatedwellingplace。（12*）Other
customsrestrictiveofpopulationmightbespecified:insome
partsofItaly，itisthepractice，accordingtoSismondi，among
thepoor，asitiswellknowntobeinthehigherranks，thatall
butoneofthesonsremainunmarried。Butsuchfamily
arrangementsarenotlikelytoexistamongday—labourers。They
aretheresourceofsmallproprietorsandmetayers，for
preventingtoominuteasubdivisionoftheland。
InEnglandgenerallythereisnowscarcelyarelicofthese
indirectcheckstopopulation;exceptthatinparishesownedby
oneoraverysmallnumberoflandowners，theincreaseof
residentlabourersisstilloccasionallyobstructed，by
preventingcottagesfrombeingbuilt，orbypullingdownthose
whichexist;thusrestrainingthepopulationliabletobecome
locallychargeable，withoutanymaterialeffectonpopulation
generally，theworkrequiredinthoseparishesbeingperformedby
labourerssettledelsewhere。Thesurroundingdistrictsalways
feelthemselvesmuchaggrievedbythispractice，againstwhich
theycannotdefendthemselvesbysimilarmeans，sinceasingle
acreoflandownedbyanyonewhodoesnotenterintothe
combination，enableshimtodefeattheattempt，veryprofitably
tohimself，bycoveringthatacrewithcottages。Tomeetthese
complaintsanActhaswithinthelastfewyearsbeenpassedby
Parliament，bywhichthepoor—rateismadeachargenotonthe
parish，butonthewholeunion。Thisenactment，inotherrespects
verybeneficial，removesthesmallremnantofwhatwasoncea
checktopopulation:thevalueofwhich，however，fromthenarrow
limitsofitsoperation，hadbecomeverytrifling。
6。Inthecase，therefore，ofthecommonagricultural
labourer，thecheckstopopulationmayalmostbeconsideredas
non—existent。Ifthegrowthofthetowns，andofthecapital
thereemployed，bywhichthefactoryoperativesaremaintainedat
theirpresentaveragerateofwagesnotwithstandingtheirrapid
increase，didnotalsoabsorbagreatpartoftheannualaddition
totheruralpopulation，thereseemsnoreasoninthepresent
habitsofthepeoplewhytheyshouldnotfallintoasmiserablea
conditionastheIrishpreviousto1846;andifthemarketfor
ourmanufacturesshould，Idonotsayfalloff，butevenceaseto
expandattherapidrateofthelastfiftyyears，thereisno
certaintythatthisfatemaynotbereservedforus。Without
carryingouranticipationsforwardtosuchacalamity，whichthe
greatandgrowingintelligenceofthefactorypopulationwould，
itmaybehoped，avert，byanadaptationoftheirhabitstotheir
circumstances;theexistingconditionofthelabourersofsomeof
themostexclusivelyagriculturalcounties，Wiltshire，
Somersetshire，Dorsetshire，Bedfordshire，Buckinghamshire，is
sufficientlypainfultocontemplate。Thelabourersofthese
counties，withlargefamilies，andeightorperhapsnine
shillingsfortheirweeklywageswheninfullemployment，have
forsometimebeenoneofthestockobjectsofpopular
compassion:itistimethattheyhadthebenefitalsoofsome
applicationofcommonsense。
Unhappily，sentimentalityratherthancommonsenseusually
presidesoverthediscussionofthesesubjects;andwhilethere
isagrowingsensitivenesstothehardshipsofthepoor，anda
readydispositiontoadmitclaimsinthemuponthegoodoffices
ofotherpeople，thereisanallbutuniversalunwillingnessto
facetherealdifficultyoftheirposition，oradvertatallto
theconditionswhichnaturehasmadeindispensabletothe
improvementoftheirphysicallot。Discussionsonthecondition
ofthelabourers，lamentationsoveritswretchedness，
denunciationsofallwhoaresupposedtobeindifferenttoit，
projectsofonekindOranotherforimprovingit，wereinno
countryandinnotimeoftheworldsorifeasinthepresent
generation;butthereisatacitagreementtoignoretotallythe
lawofwages，ortodismissitinaparenthesis，withsuchterms
as"hardheartedMalthusianism;"asifitwerenotathousand
timesmorehardheartedtotellhumanbeingsthattheymay，than
thattheymaynot，callintoexistenceswarmsofcreatureswho
aresuretohemiserable，andmostlikelytobedepraved;and
forgettingthattheconduct，whichitisreckonedsocruelto
disapprove，isadegradingslaverytoabruteinstinctinoneof
thepersonsconcerned，andmostcommonly，intheother，helpless
submissiontoarevoltingabuseofpower。
Solongasmankindremainedinasemi—barbarousstate，with
theindolenceandthefewwantsofasavage，itprobablywasnot
desirablethatpopulationshouldberestrained;thepressureof
physicalwantmayhavebeenanecessarystimulus，inthatstage
ofthehumanmind，totheexertionoflabourandingenuity
requiredforaccomplishingthatgreatestofallpastchangesin
humanmodesofexistence，bywhichindustriallifeattained
predominanceoverthehunting，thepastoral，andthemilitaryor
predatorystate。Want，inthatageoftheworld，haditsuses，as
evenslaveryhad;andtheremaybecornersoftheearthwhere
thoseusesarenotyetsuperseded，thoughtheymighteasilybeso
wereahelpinghandheldoutbymorecivilizedcommunities。But
inEuropethetime，ifiteverexisted，islongpast，whenalife
ofprivationhadthesmallesttendencytomakemeneitherbetter
workmenormorecivilizedbeings。Itis，onthecontrary，
evident，thatiftheagriculturallabourerswerebetteroff，they
wouldbothworkmoreefficiently，andbebettercitizens。Iask，
then，isittrue，ornot，thatiftheirnumberswerefewerthey
wouldobtainhigherwages？Thisisthequestion，andnoother:
anditisidletodivertattentionfromit，byattackingany
incidentalpositionofMalthusorsomeotherwriter，and
pretendingthattorefutethat，istodisprovetheprincipleof
population。Some，forinstance，haveachievedaneasyvictory
overapassingremarkofMr。Malthus，hazardedchieflybywayof
illustration，thattheincreaseoffoodmayperhapsbeassumedto
takeplaceinanarithmeticalratio，whilepopulationincreases
inageometrical:wheneverycandidreaderknowsthatMr。Malthus
laidnostressonthisunluckyattempttogivenumerical
precisiontothingswhichdonotadmitofit，andeveryperson
capableofreasoningmustseethatitiswhollysuperfluousto
hisargument。Othershaveattachedimmenseimportancetoa
correctionwhichmorerecentpoliticaleconomistshavemadein
themerelanguageoftheearlierfollowersofMr。Malthus。
Severalwritershadsaidthatitisthetendencyofpopulationto
increasefasterthanthemeansofsubsistence。Theassertionwas
trueinthesenseinwhichtheymeantit，namely，thatpopulation
wouldinmostcircumstancesincreasefasterthanthemeansof
subsistence，ifitwerenotcheckedeitherbymortalityorby
prudence。Butinasmuchasthesechecksactwithunequalforceat
differenttimesandplaces，itwaspossibletointerpretthe
languageofthesewritersasiftheyhadmeantthatpopulationis
usuallygaininggrounduponsubsistence，andthepovertyofthe
peoplebecominggreater。Underthisinterpretationoftheir
meaning，itwasurgedthatthereverseisthetruth:thatas
civilizationadvances，theprudentialchecktendstobecome
stronger，andpopulationtoslackenitsrateofincrease，
relativelytosubsistence;andthatitisanerrortomaintain
thatpopulation，inanyimprovingcommunity，tendstoincrease
fasterthan，orevensofastas，subsistence。Thewordtendency
ishereusedinatotallydifferentsensefromthatofthe
writerswhoArmedtheproposition:butwavingtheverbal
question，isitnotallowedonbothsides，thatinoldcountries，
populationpressestoocloselyuponthemeansofsubsistence？And
thoughitspressurediminishes，themoretheideasandhabitsof
thepoorestclassoflabourerscanbeimproved，towhichitisto
behopedthatthereisalwayssometendencyinaprogressive
country，yetsincethattendencyhashithertobeen，andstillis，
extremelyfaint，and（todescendtoparticulars）hasnotyet
extendedtogivingtotheWiltshirelabourershigherwagesthan
eightshillingsaweek，theonlythingwhichitisnecessaryto
consideris，whetherthatisasufficientandsuitableprovision
foralabourer？forifnot，populationdoes，asanexistingfact，
beartoogreataproportiontothewages—fund;andwhetherit
pressedstillharderornotquitesohardatsomeformerperiod，
ispracticallyofnomoment，exceptthat，iftheratioisan
improvingone，thereisthebetterhopethatbyproperaidsand
encouragementsitmaybemadetoimprovemoreandfaster。
Itisnot，however，againstreason，thattheargumentonthis
subjecthastostruggle;butagainstafeelingofdislike，which
willonlyreconcileitselftotheunwelcometruth，whenevery
deviceisexhaustedbywhichtherecognitionofthattruthcanbe
evaded。Itisnecessary，therefore，toenterintoadetailed
examinationofthesedevices，andtoforceeverypositionwhich
istakenupbytheenemiesofthepopulationprincipleintheir
determinationtofindsomerefugeforthelabourers，some
plausiblemeansofimprovingtheircondition，withoutrequiring
theexercise，eitherenforcedorvoluntary，ofany
self—restraint，oranygreatercontrolthanatpresentoverthe
animalpowerofmultiplication。Thiswillbetheobjectofthe
nextchapter。
NOTES:
1。SeethehistoricalsketchoftheconditionoftheEnglish
peasantry，preparedfromthebestauthoritiesbyMrWilliam
Thornton，inhisworkentitledOver—PopulationanditsRemedy:a
workhonourablydistinguishedfrommostotherswhichhavebeen
publishedinthepresentgeneration，byitsrationaltreatmentof
questionsaffectingtheeconomicalconditionofthelabouring
classes。
2。Supra，pp。287to291。
3。Asimilar，thoughnotanequalimprovementinthestandardof
livingtookplaceamongthelabourersofEnglandduringthe
remarkablefiftyyearsfrom1715to1765，whichwere
distinguishedbysuchanextraordinarysuccessionoffine
harvests（theyearsofdecideddeficiencynotexceedingfivein
allthatperiod）thattheaveragepriceofwheatduringthose
yearswasmuchlowerthanduringtheprevioushalfcentury。Mr
Malthuscomputesthatontheaverageofsixtyyearspreceding
1720，thelabourercouldpurchasewithaday’searningsonly
two—thirdsofapeckofwheat，whilefrom1720to1750hecould
purchaseawholepeck。Theaveragepriceofwheat，accordingto
theEtontables，forfiftyyearsendingwith1715was41s。7
3/4d。perquarter，andforthelasttwenty—threeofthese45s。
8d。，whileforthefiftyyearsfollowing，itwasnomorethana
generation，hadtimetoworkachangeinthehabitual
requirementsofthelabouringclass;andthisperiodisalways
notedasthedateof"amarkedimprovementofthequalityofthe
foodconsumed，andadecidedelevationinthestandardoftheir
comfortsandconveniences"——（Malthus，PrinciplesofPolitical
Economy，p。225。）Forthecharacteroftheperiod，seeMrTooke’s
excellentHistoryofPrices，vol。i。pp。38to61，andforthe
pricesofcorn，theAppendixtothatwork。
4。ForminganAppendix（F）totheGeneralReportofthe
Commissioners，andalsopublishedbyauthorityasaseparate
volume。
5。Preface，p。xxxix。
6。Preface，p。xxxiii。，orp。554oftheAppendixitself。
7。Appendix，p。419。
8。Ibid。p。567。
9。Kay，op。cit。i。68。
10。"Engeneral，"saysSismondi，"lenobredesmaitresetaitfixe
danschaquecommunaute，etlemaitrepouvaitseultenirboutique，
acheteretvendrepoursoncompte。Chaquemaitrenepouvait
formerqu’uncertainnombred’apprentis，auxquelsilenseignait
sonmetier;etdansplusieurscommunautes，iln’enpouvaittenir
qu’unseul。Chaquemaitrepouvaitdememetenirunnombrelimite
d’ouvriers，quiportaientlenomdecompagnons;et，dansles
metiersoul’onnepouvaitavoirqu’unseulapprenti，onne
pouvaitacheter，vendre，outravaillerdansunmetier，s’il
n’etaitapprenti，compagnon，oumaitred’anneesdeterminecomme
compagnon;ets’iln’avaitdeplusfaitsonchef—d’oeuvre，au
executeuntravaildesignedanssonmetier，quidevaitetrejuge
parsajurande。Onvoitquecetteorganisationmettaitentierment
danslamaindesmaitreslerenouvellementdescorpsdemetier。
Euxseulspouvaientrecevoirdesapprentis;maisilsn’etaient
pointobligesaenprendre;aussisefaisaient—ilspayercette
faveur，etsouventaunprixtres—eleve;ensortequ’onjeune
hommenepouvaitentrerdansunmetiers’iln’avait，au
prealable，lasommequ’ilfallaitpayerpoursonapprentissage，
etcellequiluietaitnecessairepoursesustenterpendantla
dureedecetapprentissage;carpendantquatre，cinq，ousept
ans，toutsontravailappartenaitasonmaitre。Sadependancede
cemaitreetaittoutaussilongtempsabsolue;carunseulactede
lavolonte，oumemeducapricedecelui—ci，pouvaitluifermer
l’entreedesprofessionslucratives。L’apprenti，devenu
compagnon，acqueraitunpeuplusdeliberte;ilpouvaits’engager
avecquelmaitreilvoulait，passerdel’unal’autre;etcomme
l’entreeaucompagnonagen’etaitouvertequeparl’apprentissage，
ilcommencaitaprofiterdumonopoledontilavaitsouffert，et
iletaitapeupressurdesefairebienpayeruntravailque
personnenepouvaitfaire，sicen’estlui。Cependantil
dependaitdelajurandepourobtenirlamaitrise;aussinese
regardait—ilpointencorecommeassuredesonsort，commeayant
unetat。Engeneral，ilnesemariatepointqu’ilnefutpasse
maitre。
"Ilestbiencertain，etcommefaitetcommetheorie，que
l’etablissementdescorpsdemetierempechaitetdevaitempecher
lanaissanced’unepopulationsurabondante。D’apreslesstatuts
depresquetouslescorpsdemetier，unhommenepouvaitetre
passemaitrequ’apresvingt—cinqans;maiss’iln’avaitpasun
capitalalui，s’iln’avaitpasfaitdeseconomiessuffisantes，
ilcontinuaitbienpluslongtempsatravaillercommecompagnon;
plusieurs，etpeut—etreleplusgrandnombredesartisans，
demeuraientcompagnonstouteleurvie。Iletaitpresquesans
exemple，cependant，qu’ilssemariassentavantd’etrerecus
maitres;quandilsauraienteteassezimprudenspourledesirer，
aucunperen’auraitvouludonnersafilleaunhommequin’avait
pointd’etat。"——NouveauxPrincipes，bookiv，ch。10。Seealso
AdamSmith，booki，ch。10，part2。
11。SeeThorntononOver—Population，page18，andtheauthorities
therecited。
12。Supra，p。158。
ThePrinciplesofPoliticalEconomy
byJohnStuartMill
Book2，Chapter12
OfPopularRemediesforLowWages
1。Thesimplestexpedientwhichcanbeimaginedforkeeping
thewagesoflabouruptothedesirablepoint，wouldbetofix
thembylaw:andthisisvirtuallytheobjectaimedatina
varietyofplanswhichhaveatdifferenttimesbeen，orstill
are，current，forremodellingtherelationbetweenlabourersand
employers。Nooneprobablyeversuggestedthatwagesshouldbe
absolutelyfixed;sincetheinterestsofallconcerned，often
requirethattheyshouldbevariable:butsomehaveproposedto
fixaminimumofwages，leavingthevariationsabovethatpoint
tobeadjustedbycompetition。Anotherplanwhichhasfoundmany
advocatesamongtheleadersoftheoperatives，isthatcouncils
shouldbeformed，whichinEnglandhavebeencalledlocalboards
oftrade，inFrance"conseilsdeprud’hommes，"andothernames;
consistingofdelegatesfromtheworkpeopleandfromthe
employers，whomeetinginconference，shouldagreeuponarateof
wages，andpromulgateitfromauthority，tobebindinggenerally
onemployersandworkmen;thegroundofdecisionbeing，notthe
stateofthelabour—market，butnaturalequity;toprovidethat
theworkmenshallhavereasonablewages，andthecapitalist
reasonableprofits。
Othersagain（buttheseareratherphilanthropists
interestingthemselvesforthelabouringclasses，thanthe
labouringpeoplethemselves）areshyofadmittingthe
interferenceofauthorityincontractsforlabour:theyfearthat
iflawintervened，itwouldintervenerashlyandignorantly;they
areconvincedthattwoparties，withoppositeinterests，
attemptingtoadjustthoseinterestsbynegotiationthroughtheir
representativesonprinciplesofequity，whennorulecouldbe
laiddowntodeterminewhatwasequitable，wouldmerely
exasperatetheirdifferencesinsteadofhealingthem;butwhatit
isuselesstoattemptbythelegalsanction，thesepersonsdesire
tocompassbythemoral。Everyemployer，theythink，oughtto
givesufficientwages;andifhedoesitnotwillingly，shouldbe
compelledtoitbygeneralopinion;thetestofsufficientwages
beingtheirownfeelings，orwhattheysupposetobethoseofthe
public。Thisis，Ithink，afairrepresentationofaconsiderable
bodyofexistingopiniononthesubject。
Idesiretoconfinemyremarkstotheprincipleinvolvedin
allthesesuggestions，withouttakingintoaccountpractical
difficulties，seriousasthesemustatoncebeseentobe。I
shallsupposethatbyoneorotherofthesecontrivances，wages
couldbekeptabovethepointtowhichtheywouldbebroughtby
competition。Thisisasmuchastosay，abovethehighestrate
whichcanbeaffordedbytheexistingcapitalconsistentlywith
employingallthelabourers。Foritisamistaketosupposethat
competitionmerelykeepsdownwages。Itisequallythemeansby
whichtheyarekeptup。Whenthereareanylabourersunemployed，
these，unlessmaintainedbycharity，becomecompetitorsforhire，
andwagesfall;butwhenallwhowereoutofworkhavefound
employment，wageswillnot，underthefreestsystemof
competition，falllower。Therearestrangenotionsafloat
concerningthenatureofcompetition。Somepeopleseemtoimagine
thatitseffectissomethingindefinite;thatthecompetitionof
sellersmaylowerprices，andthecompetitionoflabourersmay
lowerwages，downtozero，orsomeunassignableminimum。Nothing
canbemoreunfounded。Goodscanonlybeloweredinpriceby
competition，tothepointwhichcallsforthbuyerssufficientto
takethemoff;andwagescanonlybeloweredbycompetitionuntil
roomismadetoadmitallthelabourerstoashareinthe
distributionofthewages—fund。Iftheyfellbelowthispoint，a
portionofcapitalwouldremainunemployedforwantoflabourers;
acounter—competitionwouldcommenceonthesideofcapitalists，
andwageswouldrise。
Since，therefore，therateofwageswhichresultsfrom
competitiondistributesthewholeexistingwages—fundamongthe
wholelabouringpopulation;iflaworopinionsucceedsinfixing
wagesabovethisrate，somelabourersarekeptoutofemployment;
andasitisnottheintentionofthephilanthropiststhatthese
shouldstarve，theymustbeprovidedforbyaforcedincreaseof
thewages—fund;byacompulsorysaving。Itisnothingtofixa
minimumofwages，unlesstherebeaprovisionthatwork，orwages
atleast，befoundforallwhoapplyforit。This，accordingly，
isalwayspartofthescheme;andisconsistentwiththeideasof
morepeoplethanwouldapproveofeitheralegaloramoral
minimumofwages。Popularsentimentlooksuponitasthedutyof
therich，orofthestate，tofindemploymentforallthepoor。
Ifthemoralinfluenceofopiniondoesnotinducetherichto
sparefromtheirconsumptionenoughtosetallthepoortowork
at"reasonablewages，"itissupposedtobeincumbentonthe
statetolayontaxesforthepurpose，eitherbylocalratesor
votesofpublicmoney。Theproportionbetweenlabourandthe
wages—fundwouldthusbemodifiedtotheadvantageofthe
labourers，notbyrestrictionofpopulation，butbyanincrease
ofcapital。
2。Ifthisclaimonsocietycouldbelimitedtotheexisting
generation;ifnothingmorewerenecessarythanacompulsory
accumulation，sufficienttoprovidepermanentemploymentatample
wagesfortheexistingnumbersofthepeople;suchaproposition
wouldhavenomorestrenuoussupporterthanmyself。Society
mainlyconsistsofthosewholivebybodilylabour;andif
society，thatis，ifthelabourers，lendtheirphysicalforceto
protectindividualsintheenjoymentofsuperfluities，theyare
entitledtodoso，andhavealwaysdoneso，withthereservation
ofapowertotaxthosesuperfluitiesforpurposesofpublic
utility;amongwhichpurposesthesubsistenceofthepeopleis
theforemost。Sincenooneisresponsibleforhavingbeenborn，
nopecuniarysacrificeistoogreattobemadebythosewhohave
morethanenough，forthepurposeofsecuringenoughtoall
personsalreadyinexistence。
Butitisanotherthingaltogether，whenthosewhohave
producedandaccumulatedarecalledupontoabstainfrom
consuminguntiltheyhavegivenfoodandclothing，notonlyto
allwhonowexist，buttoallwhomtheseortheirdescendantsmay
thinkfittocallintoexistence。Suchanobligationacknowledged
andactedupon，wouldsuspendallchecks，bothpositiveand
preventive;therewouldhenothingtohinderpopulationfrom
startingforwardatitsrapidestrate;andasthenatural
increaseofcapitalwould，atthebest，notbemorerapidthan
before，taxation，tomakeupthegrowingdeficiency，mustadvance
withthesamegiganticstrides。Theattemptwouldofcoursebe
madetoexactlabourinexchangeforsupport。Butexperiencehas
shownthesortofworktobeexpectedfromrecipientsofpublic
charity。Whenthepayisnotgivenforthesakeofthework，but
theworkfoundforthesakeofthepay，inefficiencyisamatter
ofcertainty:toextractrealworkfromday—labourerswithoutthe
powerofdismissal，isonlypracticablebythepowerofthelash。
Itisconceivable，doubtless，thatthisobjectionmightbegot
over。Thefundraisedbytaxationmightbespreadoverthelabour
marketgenerally，asseemstobeintendedbythesupportersof
thedroitautravailinFrance;withoutgivingtoanyunemployed
labourerarighttodemandsupportinaparticularplaceorfrom
aparticularfunctionary。Thepowerofdismissalasregards
individuallabourers，wouldthenremain;thegovernmentonly
undertakingtocreateadditionalemploymentwhentherewasa
deficiency，andreserving，likeotheremployers，thechoiceof
itsownworkpeople。Butletthemworkeversoefficiently，the
increasingpopulationcouldnot，aswehavesooftenshown，
increasetheproduceproportionally:thesurplus，afterallwere
fed，wouldbearalessandlessproportiontothewholeproduce，
andtothepopulation:andtheincreaseofpeoplegoingonina
constantratio，whiletheincreaseofproducewentonina
diminishingratio，thesurpluswouldintimebewhollyabsorbed;
taxationforthesupportofthepoorwouldengrossthewhole
incomeofthecountry;thepayersandthereceiverswouldbe
melteddownintoonemass。Thechecktopopulationeitherby
deathorprudence，couldnotthenbestavedoffanylonger，but
mustcomeintooperationsuddenlyandatonce;everythingwhich
placesmankindaboveanestofantsoracolonyofbeavers，
havingperishedintheinterval。
Theseconsequenceshavebeensooftenandsoclearlypointed
outbyauthorsofreputation，inwritingsknownandaccessible，
thatignoranceofthemonthepartofeducatedpersonsisno
longerpardonable。Itisdoublydiscreditableinanyperson
settingupforapublicteacher，toignoretheseconsiderations;
todismissthemsilently，anddiscussordeclaimonwagesand
poor—laws，notasiftheseargumentscouldberefuted，butasif
theydidnotexist。
Everyonehasarighttolive。Wewillsupposethiscanted。
Butnoonehasarighttobringcreaturesintolife，tobe
supportedbyotherpeople。Whoevermeanstostanduponthefirst
oftheserightsmustrenounceallpretensiontothelast。Ifa
mancannotsupportevenhimselfunlessothershelphim，those
othersareentitledtosaythattheydonotalsoundertakethe
supportofanyoffspringwhichitisphysicallypossibleforhim
tosummonintotheworld。Yetthereareabundanceofwritersand
publicspeakers，includingmanyofmostostentatiouspretensions
tohighfeeling，whoseviewsoflifearesotrulybrutish，that
theyseehardshipinpreventingpaupersfrombreedinghereditary
paupersintheworkhouseitself。Posteritywillonedayaskwith
astonishment，whatsortofpeopleitcouldbeamongwhomsuch
preacherscouldfindproselytes。
Itwouldbepossibleforthestatetoguaranteeemploymentat
amplewagestoallwhoareborn。Butifitdoesthis，itisbound
inself—protection，andforthesakeofeverypurposeforwhich
governmentexists，toprovidethatnopersonshallbeborn
withoutitsconsent。Iftheordinaryandspontaneousmotivesto
self—restraintareremoved，othersmustbesubstituted。
Restrictionsonmarriage，atleastequivalenttothoseexisting
insomeoftheGermanstates，orseverepenaltiesonthosewho
havechildrenwhenunabletosupportthem，wouldthenbe
indispensable。Societycanfeedthenecessitous，ifittakes
theirmultiplicationunderitscontrol;or（ifdestituteofall
moralfeelingforthewretchedoffspring）itcanleavethelast
totheirdiscretion，abandoningthefirsttotheirowncare。But
itcannotwithimpunitytakethefeedinguponitself，andleave
themultiplyingfree。
Togiveprofuselytothepeople，whetherunderthenameof
charityorofemployment，withoutplacingthemundersuch
influencesthatprudentialmotivesshallactpowerfullyupon
them，istolavishthemeansofbenefitingmankind，without
attainingtheobject。Leavethepeopleinasituationinwhich
theirconditionmanifestlydependsupontheirnumbers，andthe
greatestpermanentbenefitmaybederivedfromanysacrificemade
toimprovethephysicalwell—beingofthepresentgeneration，and
raise，bythatmeans，thehabitsoftheirchildren。Butremove
theregulationoftheirwagesfromtheirowncontrol;guarantee
tothemacertainpayment，eitherbylaw，orbythefeelingof
thecommunity;andnoamountofcomfortthatyoucangivethem
willmakeeitherthemortheirdescendantslooktotheirown
self—restraintasthepropermeansofpreservingtheminthat
state。Youwillonlymakethemindignantlyclaimthecontinuance
ofyourguarantee，tothemselvesandtheirfullcomplementof
possibleposterity。
Onthesegroundssomewritershavealtogethercondemnedthe
Englishpoor—law，andanysystemofrelieftotheable—bodied，at
leastwhenuncombinedwithsystematiclegalprecautionsagainst
over—population。ThefamousActofthe43dofElizabeth
undertook，onthepartofthepublic，toprovideworkandwages
forallthedestituteable—bodied:andthereislittledoubtthat
iftheintentofthatActhadbeenfullycarriedout，andno
meanshadbeenadoptedbytheadministratorsofreliefto
neutralizeitsnaturaltendencies，thepoor—ratewouldbythis
timehaveabsorbedthewholenetproduceofthelandandlabour
ofthecountry。Itisnotatallsurprising，therefore，thatMr。
Malthusandothersshouldatfirsthaveconcludedagainstall
poor—lawswhatever。Itrequiredmuchexperience，andcareful
examinationofdifferentmodesofpoor—lawmanagement，togive
assurancethattheadmissionofanabsoluterighttobesupported
atthecostofotherpeople，couldexistinlawandinfact，
withoutfatallyrelaxingthespringsofindustryandthe
restraintsofprudence。This，however，wasfullysubstantiated，
bytheinvestigationsoftheoriginalPoorLawCommissioners。
Hostileastheyareunjustlyaccusedofbeingtotheprincipleof
legalrelief，theyarethefirstwhofullyprovedthe
compatibilityofanyPoorLaw，inwhicharighttoreliefwas
recognised，withthepermanentinterestsofthelabouringclass
andofposterity。Byacollectionoffacts，experimentally
ascertainedinparishesscatteredthroughoutEngland，itwas
shownthattheguaranteeofsupportcouldbefreedfromits
injuriouseffectsuponthemindsandhabitsofthepeople，ifthe
relief，thoughampleinrespecttonecessaries，wasaccompanied
withconditionswhichtheydisliked，consistingofsome
restraintsontheirfreedom，andtheprivationofsome
indulgences。Underthisproviso，itmayberegardedas
irrevocablyestablished，thatthefateofnomemberofthe
communityneedsbeabandonedtochance;thatsocietycanand
thereforeoughttoinsureeveryindividualbelongingtoit
againsttheextremeofwant;thattheconditionevenofthosewho
areunabletofindtheirownsupport，needsnotbeoneof
physicalsuffering，orthedreadofit，butonlyofrestricted
indulgence，andenforcedrigidityofdiscipline。Thisissurely
somethinggainedforhumanity，importantinitself，andstill
moresoasasteptosomethingbeyond;andhumanityhasnoworse
enemiesthanthosewholendthemselves，eitherknowinglyor
unintentionally，tobringodiumonthislaw，orontheprinciples
inwhichitoriginated。
3。Nexttotheattemptstoregulatewages，andprovide
artificiallythatallwhoarewillingtoworkshallreceivean
adequatepricefortheirlabour，wehavetoconsideranother
classofpopularremedies，whichdonotprofesstointerferewith
freedomofcontract;whichleavewagestobefixedbythe
competitionofthemarket，but，whentheyareconsidered
insufficient，endeavourbysomesubsidiaryresourcetomakeupto
thelabourersfortheinsufficiency。Ofthisnaturewasthe
expedientresortedtobyparishauthoritiesduringthirtyor
fortyyearspreviousto1834，generallyknownastheAllowance
System。Thiswasfirstintroduced，when，throughasuccessionof
badseasons，andconsequenthighpricesoffood，thewagesof
labourhadbecomeinadequatetoaffordtothefamiliesofthe
agriculturallabourerstheamountofsupporttowhichtheyhad
beenaccustomed。Sentimentsofhumanity，joinedwiththeidea
theninculcatedinhighquarters，thatpeopleoughtnottobe
allowedtosufferforhavingenrichedtheircountrywitha
multitudeofinhabitants，inducedthemagistratesoftherural
districtstocommencegivingparishrelieftopersonsalreadyin
privateemployment:andwhenthepracticehadoncebeen
sanctioned，theimmediateinterestofthefarmers，whomit
enabledtothrowpartofthesupportoftheirlabourersuponthe
otherinhabitantsoftheparish，ledtoagreatandrapid
extensionofit。Theprincipleofthisschemebeingavowedlythat
ofadaptingthemeansofeveryfamilytoitsnecessities，itwas
anaturalconsequencethatmoreshouldbegiventothemarried
thantothesingle，andtothosewhohadlargefamiliesthanto
thosewhohadnot:infact，anallowancewasusuallycantedfor
everychild。Sodirectandpositiveanencouragementto
populationisnot，however，inseparablefromthescheme:the
allowanceinaidofwagesmightbeafixedthing，giventoall
labourersalike，andasthisistheleastobjectionableform
whichthesystemcanassume，wewillgiveitthebenefitofthe
supposition。
Itisobviousthatthisismerelyanothermodeoffixinga
minimumofwages;nootherwisedifferingfromthedirectmode，
thaninallowingtheemployertobuythelabouratitsmarket
price，thedifferencebeingmadeuptothelabourerfromapublic
fund。Theonekindofguaranteeisopentoalltheobjections
whichhavebeenurgedagainsttheother。Itpromisestothe
labourersthattheyshallallhaveacertainamountofwages，
howevernumeroustheymaybe:andremoves，therefore，alikethe
positiveandtheprudentialobstaclestoanunlimitedincrease。
Butbesidestheobjectionscommontoallattemptstoregulate
wageswithoutregulatingpopulation，theallowancesystemhasa
peculiarabsurdityofitsown。Thisis，thatitinevitablytakes
fromwageswithonehandwhatitaddstothemwiththeother。
Thereisarateofwages，eitherthelowestonwhichthepeople
can，orthelowestonwhichtheywillconsent，tolive。Wewill
supposethistobesevenshillingsaweek。Shockedatthe
wretchednessofthispittance，theparishauthoritieshumanely
makeituptoten。Butthelabourersareaccustomedtoseven，and
thoughtheywouldgladlyhavemore，willliveonthat（asthe
factproves）ratherthanrestraintheinstinctofmultiplication。
Theirhabitswillnotbealteredforthebetterbygivingthem
parishpay。Receivingthreeshillingsfromtheparish，theywill
beaswelloffasbeforethoughtheyshouldincreasesufficiently
tobringdownwagestofourshillings。Theywillaccordingly
peopledowntothatpoint;orperhaps，withoutwaitingforan
increaseofnumbers，thereareunemployedlabourersenoughinthe
workhousetoproducetheeffectatonce。Itiswellknownthat
theallowancesystemdidpracticallyoperateinthemode
described，andthatunderitsinfluencewagessanktoalower
ratethanhadbeenknowninEnglandbefore。Duringthelast
century，underaratherrigidadministrationofthepoor—laws，
populationincreasedslowly，andagriculturalwageswere
considerablyabovethestarvationpoint。Undertheallowance
systemthepeopleincreasedsofast，andwagessanksolow，that
withwagesandallowancetogether，familieswereworseoffthan
theyhadbeenbeforewithwagesalone。Whenthelabourerdepends
solelyonwages，thereisavirtualminimum。Ifwagesfallbelow
thelowestratewhichwillenablethepopulationtobekeptup，
depopulationatleastrestoresthemtothatlowestrate。Butif
thedeficiencyistobemadeupbyaforcedcontributionfromall
whohaveanythingtogive，wagesmayfallbelowstarvationpoint;
theymayfallalmosttozero。Thisdeplorablesystem，worsethan
anyotherformofpoor—lawabuseyetinvented，inasmuchasit
pauperizesnotmerelytheunemployedpartofthepopulationbut
thewhole，receivedaseverecheckfromthePoorLawof1834:I
wishitcouldbesaidthattherearenosignsofitsrevival。
4。Butwhilethisisgenerallycondemned，thereisanother
modeofreliefinaidofwages，whichisstillhighlypopular;a
modegreatlypreferable，morallyandsocially，toparish
al1owance，buttending，itistobefeared，toaverysimilar
economicalresult:Imeanthemuch—boastedAllotmentSystem。
This，too，isacontrivancetocompensatethelabourerforthe
insufficiencyofhiswages，bygivinghimsomethingelseasa
supplementtothem:butinsteadofhavingthemmadeupfromthe
poor—rate，heisenabledtomakethemupforhimself，byrenting
asmallpieceofground，whichhecultivateslikeagardenby
spadelabour，raisingpotatoesandothervegetablesforhome
consumption，withperhapssomeadditionalquantityforsale。If
hehiresthegroundreadymanured，hesometimespaysforitatas
higharateaseightpoundsanacre:butgettinghisownlabour
andthatofhisfamilyfornothing，heisabletogainseveral
poundsbyitevenatsohigharent。（1*）Thepatronsofthe
systemmakeitagreatpointthattheallotmentshallbeinaid
ofwages，andnotasubstituteforthem;thatitshallnotbe
suchasalabourercanliveon，butonlysufficienttooccupythe
sparehoursanddaysofamanintolerablyregularagricultural
employment，withassistancefromhiswifeandchildren。They
usuallylimittheextentofasingleallotmenttoaquarter，or
somethingbetweenaquarterandhalfanacre。Ifitexceedsthis，
withoutbeingenoughtooccupyhimentirely，itwillmakehim，
theysay，abadanduncertainworkmanforhire:ifitis
sufficienttotakehimentirelyoutoftheclassofhired
labourers，andtobecomehissolemeansofsubsistence，itwill
makehimanIrishcottier:forwhichassertion，attheenormous
rentsusuallydemanded，thereissomefoundation。Butintheir
precautionsagainstcottierism，thesewell—meaningpersonsdonot
perceive，thatifthesystemtheypatronizeisnotacottier
system，itis，inessentials，neithermorenorlessthanasystem
ofconacre。
Thereisnodoubtamaterialdifferencebetweenekingout
insufficientwagesbyafundraisedbytaxation，anddoingthe
samethingbymeanswhichmakeaclearadditiontothegross
produceofthecountry。Thereisalsoadifferencebetween
helpingalabourerbymeansofhisownindustry，andsubsidizing
himinamodewhichtendstomakehimcarelessandidle。Onboth
thesepoints，allotmentshaveanunquestionableadvantageover
parishallowances。Butintheireffectonwagesandpopulation，I
seenoreasonwhythetwoplansshouldsubstantiallydiffer。All
subsidiesinaidofwagesenablethelabourertodowithless
remuneration，andthereforeultimatelybringdownthepriceof
labourbythefullamount，unlessachangebewroughtinthe
ideasandrequirementsofthelabouringclass;analterationin
therelativevaluewhichtheysetuponthegratificationoftheir
instincts，andupontheincreaseoftheircomfortsandthe
comfortsofthoseconnectedwiththem。Thatanysuchchangein
theircharactershouldbeproducedbytheallotmentsystem，
appearstomeathingnottobeexpected。Thepossessionofland，
wearesometimestold，rendersthelabourerprovident。Property
inlanddoesso;orwhatisequivalenttoproperty，occupationon
fixedtermsandonapermanenttenure。Butmerehiringfromyear
toyearwasneverfoundtohaveanysucheffect。Didpossession
oflandrendertheIrishmanprovident？Testimonies，itistrue，
abound，andIdonotseektodiscreditthem，ofthebeneficial
changeproducedintheconductandconditionoflabourers，by
receivingallotments。Suchaneffectistobeexpectedwhile
thosewhoholdthemareasmallnumber;aprivilegedclass，
havingastatusabovethecommonlevel，whichtheyareunwilling
tolose。Theyarealso，nodoubt，almostalways，originallya
selectclass，composedofthemostfavourablespecimensofthe
labouringpeople:which，however，isattendedwiththe
inconveniencethatthepersonstowhomthesystemfacilitates
marryingandhavingchildren，arepreciselythosewhowould
otherwisehethemostlikelytopractiseprudentialrestraint。As
affectingthegeneralconditionofthelabouringclass，the
scheme，asitseemstome，mustbeeithernugatoryor
mischievous。Ifonlyafewlabourershaveallotments，theyare
naturallythosewhocoulddobestwithoutthem，andnogoodis
donetotheclass:while，ifthesystemweregeneral，andevery
oralmosteverylabourerhadanallotment，Ibelievetheeffect
wouldbemuchthesameaswheneveryoralmosteverylabourerhad
anallowanceinaidofwages。Ithinktherecanbenodoubtthat
if，attheendofthelastcentury，theAllotmentinsteadofthe
AllowancesystemhadbeengenerallyadoptedinEngland，itwould
equallyhavebrokendownatthattimedidreallyexist;
populationwouldhavestartedforwardexactlyasinfactitdid;
andintwentyyears，wagesplustheallotmentwouldhavebeen，as
wagesplustheallowanceactuallywere，nomorethanequaltothe
formerwageswithoutanyallotment。Theonlydifferenceinfavour
ofallotmentswouldhavebeen，thattheymakethepeoplegrow
theirownpoor—rates。
Iamatthesametimequitereadytoallow，thatinsome
circumstances，thepossessionoflandatafairrent，even
withoutownership，bythegeneralityoflabourersforhire，
operatesasacausenotoflow，butofhighwages。This，however，
iswhentheirlandrendersthem，totheextentofactual
necessaries，independentofthemarketforlabour。Thereisthe
greatestdifferencebetweenthepositionofpeoplewholiveby
wages，withlandasanextraresource，andofpeoplewhocan，in
caseofnecessity，subsistentirelyontheirland，andonlywork
forhiretoaddtotheircomforts。Wagesarelikelytobehigh
wherenonearecompelledbynecessitytoselltheirlabour。
"Peoplewhohaveathomesomekindofpropertytoapplytheir
labourto，willnotselltheirlabourforwagesthatdonot
affordthemabetterdietthanpotatoesandmaize，althoughin
savingforthemselves，theymayliveverymuchonpotatoesand
maize。WeareoftensurprisedintravellingontheContinent，to
hearofarateofday’swagesveryhigh，consideringthe
abundanceandcheapnessoffood。Itiswantofthenecessityor
theinclinationtotakework，thatmakesday—labourscarce，and，
consideringthepriceofprovisions，dear，inmanypartsofthe
Continent，wherepropertyinlandiswidelydiffusedamongthe
people。"（2*）TherearepartsoftheContinent，where，evenofthe
inhabitantsofthetowns，scarcelyoneseemstobeexclusively
dependentonhisostensibleemployment;andnothingelsecan
explainthehighpricetheyputontheirservices，andthe
carelessnesstheyevinceastowhethertheyareemployedatall。
Buttheeffectwouldbefardifferentiftheirlandorother
resourcesgavethemonlyafractionofasubsistence，leaving
themunderanundiminishednecessityofsellingtheirlabourfor
wagesinanoverstockedmarket。Theirlandwouldthenmerely
enablethemtoexistonsmallerwages，andtocarrytheir
multiplicationsomuchthefurtherbeforereachingthepoint
belowwhichtheyeithercouldnot，orwouldnotdescend。
TotheviewIhavetakenoftheeffectofallotments，Isee
noargumentwhichcanbeopposed，butthatemployedbyMr。
Thornton，（3*）withwhomonthissubjectIamatissue。His
defenceofallotmentsisgroundedonthegeneraldoctrine，that
itisonlytheverypoorwhomultiplywithoutregardto
consequences，andthatifthetheconditionoftheexisting
generationcouldbegreatlyimproved，whichhethinksmightbe
donebytheallotmentsystem，theirsuccessorswouldgrowupwith
anincreasedstandardofrequirements，andwouldnothave
familiesuntiltheycouldkeeptheminasmuchcomfortasthatin
whichtheyhadbeenbroughtupthemselves。Iagreeinasmuchof
thisargumentasgoestoprovethatasuddenandgreat
improvementintheconditionofthepoor，hasalways，throughits
effectontheirhabitsoflife，achanceofbecomingpermanent。
WhathappenedatthetimeoftheFrenchRevolutionisanexample。
ButIcannotthinkthattheadditionofaquarterorevenhalfan
acretoeverylabourer’scottage，andthattooatarackrent，
would（afterthefallofwageswhichwouldbenecessarytoabsorb
thealreadyexistingmassofpauperlabour）makesogreata
differenceinthecomfortsofthefamilyforagenerationto
come，astoraiseupfromchildhoodalabouringpopulationwitha
reallyhigherpermanentstandardofrequirementsandhabits。So
smallaportionoflandcouldonlybemadeapermanentbenefit，
byholdingoutencouragementtoacquirebyindustryandsaving，
themeansofbuyingitoutright:apermissionwhich，if
extensivelymadeuseof，wouldbeakindofeducationin
forethoughtandfrugalitytotheentireclass，theeffectsof
whichmightnotceasewiththeoccasion。Thebenefitwould
howeverarise，notfromwhatwasgiventhem，butfromwhatthey
werestimulatedtoacquire。