点击下载App，搜索"James Mill",免费读到尾

　　72。Ibid。，p。135，M’Cullochadmitsthepossibilitythatamanmayjudgehisowninterestswrongly，butthinksthathiswillnothappeninonecaseoutoftwentyIbid。，p。

　　15。

　　73。SeeTorrens’sProductionofWealth，p。208；andM’Culloch’sPoliticalEconomy1843，p。294，whereheadmitsmoreexceptions。

　　74。ExternalCorn-Trade，p。87，etc。

　　75。PoliticalEconomysecondedition，pp。21，22。

　　76。Ibid。，p。67。

　　77。PoliticalEconomy1925，p。329。

　　78。ProductionofWealth，p。34，etc。

　　79。PoliticalEconomy1825，p。318。

　　80。Mill’sPoliticalEconomysecondedition，p。102；M’Culloch’sPoliticalEconomy1825，pp。289-291。

　　81。M’Culloch’sPoliticalEconomy，p。290。

　　82。PrefacetoExternalCorn-trade。

　　83。Ibid。，p。95。

　　84。PoliticalEconomy1825，pp。313-18。Thisargumentdisappearsinlatereditions。

　　85。Ibid。，p。217。

　　86。PoliticalEconomy，p。221。DeQuinceymakesagreatpointofthisdoctrine，ofwhichitisnotworthwhiletoexaminethemeaning。

　　87。PoliticalEconomy，p。221n。

　　88。Ibid。，p。336。

　　89。Ibid。，p。337。

　　90。’EssayuponthecircumstanceswhichdeterminetheRateofWages。’1826，p。113。ThiswaswrittenforConstable’sMiscellany，andismainlyrepetitionfromthePoliticalEconomy。Itwasrepublished，withalterations，in1851。

　　91。PoliticalEconomy，pp。359-61。

　　92。Ibid。，1843，p。178。

　　AndseehisremarksontheunfavourablesideoftheFactorySystem，p。

　　186seq。

　　93。’Wherevertwopersonshavethemeansofsubsisting，’ashequaintlyobserves，’amarriageinvariablytakesplace。’PoliticalEconomy，p。154。

　　94。PoliticalEconomy，p。206。

　　95。PoliticalEconomy，p。344。

　　96。Ibid。，pp。349-52。

　　97。Seepamphletontherateofwages，pp。178-204。

　　98。Tooke’sThoughtsandDetailsontheHighandLowPricesofthelastThirtyYearsappearedin1823secondedition1824。ThiswasrewrittenandembodiedintheHistoryofPrices，thefirsttwovolumesofwhichappearedin1838。Fourlatervolumesappearedin1839，1848，and1857。

　　99。ThepopularviewisgivenbySouthey。TheRadicals，hesaysin1923，desirewarbecausetheyexpectittoleadtorevolution。’Inthistheyaregreatlydeceived，foritwouldrestoreagriculturalprosperity，andgiveanewspurtoourmanufactures。’

　　SelectionfromSouthey’sLetters，iii，382。SeealsoLifeandCorrespondence，iv，228，286。

　　Chapter6：EconomicHereticsI。TheMalthusianControversyTheEconomictheorybecametriumphant。Expoundedfromnewuniversitychairs，summarisedintextbooksforschools，advocatedinthepress，andappliedbyanenergeticpartytosomeofthemostimportantpoliticaldiscussionsoftheday，itclaimedtheadhesionofallenlightenedpersons。Itenjoyedtheprestigeofascientificdoctrine，andthemostpopularretortseemedtobeaninvoluntaryconcessionofitsclaims。Whenopponentsappealedfrom’theorists’topracticalmen，theUtilitariansscornfullysetthemdownasvirtuallyappealingfromreasontoprejudice。Norivaltheoryheldthefield。IfMalthusandRicardodiffered，itwasadifferencebetweenmenwhoacceptedthesamefirstprinciples。

　　TheybothprofessedtointerpretAdamSmithasthetrueprophet，andrepresenteddifferentshadesofopinionratherthandivergingsects。Therewere，however，symptomsofopposition，which，atthetime，mightbesetdownassimplereluctancetolistentodisagreeabletruths。Inreality，theywereindicationsofadissatisfactionwhichwastobecomeofmoreimportanceandtoleadintimetoamoredecidedrevolt。Imustindicatesomeofthem，thoughtheexpressionsofdissentweresovariousandconfusedthatitisnotveryeasytoreducethemtoorder。

　　Malthus’sdoctrinewasreallyatthebaseofthewholetheory，thoughitmustbeadmittedthatneitherMalthushimselfnorhisopponentswereclearastowhathisdoctrinereallywas。Hisassailantsoftenattackedtheorieswhichhedisavowed，orassertedprincipleswhichheclaimedashisown。1ImentiononlytosetasidesomerespectableandwearisomegentlemensuchasIngram，Jarrold，Weyland，andGrahame，whoconsideredMalthuschieflyasimpugningthewisdomofProvidence。Theyquotethedivinelaw，’increaseandmultiply’；thinkthatMalthusregardsviceandmiseryasblessings，andprovethatpopulationdoesnot’tend’toincreasetoorapidly。JarroldapparentlyacceptsthedoctrinewhichMalthusattributestoS&uuml；ssmilch，thatliveshavebeenshortenedsincethedaysofthepatriarchs，andthereproductiveforcesdiminishedastheworldhasgrownfuller。Grahamebelievesinaprovidential’ordeal，’constitutedbyinfantmortality，whichisnot，likewarandvice，duetohumancorruption，butabeneficentregulatingforcewhichcorrelatesfertilitywiththestateofsociety。ThismightbetakenbyMalthusasmerelyamountingtoanotherversionofhischecks。Suchbooks，infact，simplyshow，whatdoesnotrequiretobefurtheremphasised，thatMalthushadputhisversionofthestruggleforexistenceintoaformwhichseemedscandaloustotheaverageorthodoxperson。ThevaguenessofMalthushimselfandtheconfusedargumentofsuchopponentsmakesitdoubtfulwhethertheyarereallyansweringhistheoriesorreducingthemtoalessrepulsiveformofstatement。

　　Inotherdirections，theMalthusiandoctrinerousedkeenfeelingonbothsides，andthelinetakenbydifferentpartiesissignificant。Malthushadappearedasanantagonistoftherevolutionaryparty。Hehadlaiddownwhathetooktobeaninsuperableobstacletotherealisationoftheirdreams。YethisviewswereadoptedandextendedbythosewhocalledthemselvesthoroughRadicals。As，inourdays，Darwinismhasbeenclaimedassupportingbothindividualistandsocialisticconclusions，thetheoryofhispredecessor，Malthus，mightbeappliedinaRadicaloraConservativesense。Inpointoffact，MalthuswasatonceadoptedbytheWhigs，asrepresentedbytheEdinburghReview。

　　TheywerefollowersofAdamSmithandDugaldStewart；theypiquedthemselves，and，asevenJamesMilladmitted，withjustice，uponeconomicorthodoxy。

　　TheywereatthesametimepredisposedtoatheorywhichcondemnedtherevolutionaryUtopias。Itprovidedthemwithaneffectiveweaponagainsttheagitatorswhomtheyespeciallydreaded。TheToriesmightbealittlerestrainedbyorthodoxqualms。In1812SoutheywaspermittedtomakeanonslaughtuponMalthusintheQuarterly；2butmorecomplimentaryallusionsfollowed，andfiveyearslatertheessaywaselaboratelydefendedinanablearticle。3Anapologywaseveninsinuatedforthepreviousassault，thoughtheblamewasthrownuponMalthusforputtinghisdoctrinesinanoffensiveshape。AreferencetoOwensuggeststhatthealarmexcitedbySocialismhadsuggestedtheneedofsomesoundpoliticaleconomy。

　　Anothercontroversywhichwasbeingcarriedonatintervalsindicatesthelineofcleavagebetweenthecapitalistandthelandedinterest。JamesMil’searlypamphlet，CommerceDefended1808，andTorrens’spamphlet，EconomistsRefuted，weresuggestedbythisdiscussion。AlthoughthewarwaspartlyindefenceofBritishtrade，itsvicissitudesproducedvariouscommercialcrises；

　　andthepatrioticTorieswereanxioustoshowthatwecouldthriveevenifourtradewasshutoutfromtheContinent。Thetradingclassesmaintainedthattheyreallysuppliedthesinewsofwar，andhadarighttosomecontrolofthepolicy。ThecontroversyabouttheordersincouncilandBerlindecreesemphasisedthesedisputes，andcalledsomeattentiontothequestionsinvolvedintheoldcontroversybetweenthe’mercantile’andthe’agricultural’

　　systems。AgrotesqueexaggerationofonetheorywasgivenbyMill’sopponent，WilliamSpence41783-1860，inhisBritainIndependentofCommerce，whichwentthroughseveraleditionsin1808，andrefurbishedorpervertedthedoctrineoftheFrencheconomists。Theargument，atleast，showswhatfallaciesthenneededconfutationbytheorthodox，intheprefacetohiscollectedtracts，Spenceobservesthatthehighpriceofcornwasthecauseof’allourwealthandprosperityduringthewar。’TheCausesofthehighprice’assisted，’headmits，’byoccasionalbadseasons’

　　werethe’nationaldebt，inotherwords，taxation，’whichraisedtheprice，first，ofnecessaries，andthenofluxuriesthus，hesays，’neutralisingitsotherwiseinjuriouseffects’，andthevirtualmonopolybytheagriculturistofthehomemarket。5Allourwealth，thatis，wasproducedbytaxationaidedbyfamine，or，inbrief，bythelandowner’spowerofsqueezingmoreoutofthepoor。Foreigntrade，accordingtoSpence，isaltogethersuperfluous。ItseffectissummedupbythestatementthatwegivehardwaretoAmerica，and，inreturn，getonly’thevileweed，tobacco。’6Spence’swritingsonlyshowtheeffectofstrongprejudicesonaweakbrain。

　　Asimilarsentimentdictatedamorenoteworthyargumenttoamuchablerwriter，whoserelationtoMalthusissignificant——ThomasChalmers1780-1847，7probablybestrememberedatpresentforhisleadershipofthegreatdisruptionof1843。Hehadareputationforeloquenceandphilosophicabilitynotfullyintelligibleatthepresentday。Hisappearancewasuncouth，andhiswrittenstyleisoftenclumsy。Hegaveanimpressionattimesofindolenceandoftimidity。Yethissuperficialqualitiesconcealedanardenttemperamentandcordialaffections。Underasufficientstimulushecouldblazeoutinstirringspeechandvigorousaction。Hisintellectualtrainingwaslimited。

　　Hehad，wearetold，beenmuchinfluencedinhisyouthbytheFrenchphilosophersofthetime，andhadappearedonthesideofthemorefreethinkingpartyinthefamousLesliecontroversy，Soonafterwards，however，hewasconvertedto’evangelical’views。HestillacceptedThomasBrownasagreatmetaphysician，8butthoughtthatmoralquestionsBrown’sdeisticaloptimismrequiredtobecorrectedbyaninfusionofButler’stheoryofconscience。HecouldadaptButler’sAnalogy，andwriteedifyingBridgewatertreatise。

　　Ineedonlysay，however，that，thoughhisphilosophywasnotveryprofoundhehadanenthusiasmwhichenableshimattimetowriteforciblyandimpressively。

　　Chalmerswasfrom1803to1815ministerofKilmany，Fifeshire，andhisattentionhadalreadydrawntothequestionofpauperism。HetookpartintheSpencecontroversy，byanessayupontheExtentofStabilityofNationalResources。9InthisheexpoundeddoctrinewhichisafterwardsgiveninhisPoliticalEconomyinConnectionwiththeMoralStateandMoralofAspectsSociety。10Themainpurposeofhisearlybookisthuspatriotic。Itismeant，likeSpence’spamphlet，toprovethatNapoleoncoulddousnovitalinjury。

　　Shouldhesucceed，hewouldonlylopoffsuperfluousbranches，nothewdownthemaintrunk。Chalmers’sargumenttoshowtheeasewithwhichacountrymayrecovertheeffectsofadisastrouswarishighlypraisedbyJ。S。Mill11asthefirstsoundexplanationofthefacts。Chalmers’sposition，however，isradicallydifferentfromthepositionofeitherJamesorJ。S。Mill，EssentiallyitisthedevelopmentoftheFrencheconomists’