Malthusarguesthat’perfectibility’givesanimpossibleendbecauseequalitywouldleadtoviceandmisery。ButwhyshouldwenotsupposewithGodwinachangeofcharacterwhichwouldimplyprudenceandchastity?Menastheyaremaybeincapableofequalitybecausetheyhavebrutalpassions。Butmenastheyaretobemayceasetobebrutalandbecomecapableofequality。
This，indeed，representsaseriouscriticism。WhatMalthuswasreallyconcernedtoprovewasthatthesocialstateandthecorrespondingcharactersupposeeachother；andthatrealimprovementsupposesthattheindividualmustsomehowacquiretheinstinctsappropriatetoanimprovedstate。Thedifferencebetweenhimandhisopponentswasthatheemphasisedthemischiefoflegislation，suchasthatembodiedinthepoor-law，whichcontemplatedaforciblechange，destroyingpovertywithoutraisingthepoorman’scharacter。Suchariserequiredalonganddifficultelaboration，andhethereforedwellsmainlyuponthefollyofthelegislative，unsupportedbythemoral，remedy。ToGodwin，ontheotherhand，whoprofessedanunlimitedfaithinthepowerofreason，thisdifficultywascomparativelyunimportant。Removepoliticalinequalitiesandmenwillspontaneouslybecomevirtuousandprudent。
Godwinaccordingly，whenansweringDr。ParrandMackintosh，36in1801，welcomedMalthus’sfirstversionoftheessay。Hedeclaresittobeas’unquestionableanEditiontothetheoryofpoliticaleconomy’ashasbeenmadebyanywriterforacenturypast’；and’admitstheratiostotheirfullextent。’37Inthisphilosophicalspiritheproceedstodrawsomeratherstartlingconclusions。Hehopesthat，asmankindimproves，suchpracticesasinfanticidewillnotbenecessity；butheremarksthatitwouldbehappierforachildtoperishininfancythantospendseventyyearsinviceandmisery。38HereferstotheinhabitantsofCeylonasaprecedentforencouragingotherpracticesrestrictiveofpopulation。Inshort，thoughhehopesthatsuchmeasuresmaybeneedless，hedoesnotshrinkfromadmittingtheirpossiblenecessity。Sofar，then，GodwinandMalthusmightformanalliance。Equalitymightbethegoalofboth；andbothmightadmitthenecessityofchangeincharacteraswellasinthepoliticalframework；onlythatMalthuswouldlaymorestressupontheeviloflegislativechangesoutrunningorindependentofmoralchange。Here，however，arosetherealoffence。Malthushadinsisteduponthenecessityofself-help。Hehadridiculedthepretensionsofgovernmenttofixtherateofwages；andhadshownhowthepoor-lawsdefeatedtheirownobjects。ThiswasthereallyoffensivegroundtothepoliticalRadicals。
Theyhadbeeninthehabitoftracingallevilstotheselfishnessandrapacityoftherulers；pensions，sinecures，publicdebts，hugearmies，profligateluxuriesofallkinds，werethefruitsofbadgovernmentandthetruecausesofpoverty。Kingsandpriestsweretheharpieswhohadsettleduponmankind，andwereruiningtheirhappiness。Malthus，theythought，wasinsinuatingabaseapologyforrulerswhenheattributedtheeviltothecharacterofthesubjectsinsteadofattributingittothewickednessoftheirrulers。HewasasbadastheoldTory，Johnson，39exclaiming：——
’HowsmallofallthathumanheartsendureThatpartwhichkingsandlawscancauseorcure！’