Main Features Malthus' 'An Essay on the Principle of Population'
Introduction
Thomas Robert Malthus (1766-1834) was an English economist and politician. He was born in Surrey, in a family which belonged to a class of gentry, which was considered as rather high up in the social hierarchy of England at that time. He was educated at the prestigious Cambridge University, where he left in 1791 with a master’s degree. In 1798, he published An Essay on the Principle of Population as It Affects the Future Improvement of Society, with Remarks on the Speculations of Mr. Godwin, M. Condorcet, and Other Writers (also known as An Essay on the Principle of Population), which is arguably his most well-known work.
In An Essay on the Principle of Population, he offers his views and concerns on the rapidly increasing population at the height of the Industrial Revolution, and the risks of the population explosion which might consequent from it. He expresses particular concerns on the sustainability of food, with the famous quote “Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio. Subsistence increases only in an arithmetical ratio”, indicating that if the population were to increase at a current rate, there would not be enough food available to support the increasing population. Although he offered preventative measures such as postponing marriage for the sake of birth control, he was still confident that the population will expand beyond the natural limit. In An Essay on the Principle of Population, he used an example of an imaginary island, where he explained that unless the population stops increasing at the geometrical ratio, it would lead to severe famine, which would leave millions of people unfed. This very work is the origin of the long-lasting debate related to the principle of “The Malthusian Trap”, which is an idea that if a country was to undergo a population explosion, and lead to natural crisis such as famine or diseases, then the population increase will naturally be slowed down and will eventually settle at a reasonable margin. The validity of this principle is still in the midst of heated debates to this day.
It can be perceived from the content of An Essay on the Principle of Population, that Malthus was particularly concerned about the sustainability of farming, as it was the most crucial factor in the production of food. During his active years, he often engaged in debates with other economists and politicians on topics related to various policies on agricultural reforms and trading of food. His most famous opponent was a fellow English economist named David Ricardo (1772-1823). They often exchanged letters and published pamphlets, claiming where they stand in the spectrums of each argument. In this paper, I will describe and explain the events which affected the food and agricultural policies of England, and what Malthus saw in each event. Ultimately, this essay will seek to determine the views which Malthus held on the topic of agriculture, and what he believed in in terms of agricultural reforms and policies. It will mainly refer to Malthus’ publications, and secondary sources which provide insights to his achievements.
An Essay on the Principle of Population
Malthus refers to his stance on agriculture in An Essay on the Principle of Population. In Chapter 5, he claims that the works of those who work in the agricultural industry is underrated, due to the sudden shift of the demographics to the manufacturing industry. At the same time, he also blames the structural systems that overlook the agricultural industry, stating that efforts should be made to “weaken and destroy all those institutions relating to corporations, apprenticeships, etc., which cause the labours of agriculture to be worse paid than the labours of trade and manufactures”. He believed that England will not be able to produce the right amount and quality of food as it should, unless the current system which is founded upon the idea to exploit those who work tirelessly to provide food for the entire country every day. He concludes that if the right measures are taken to dissolve the current system, not only the quality and quantity of the products would be improved, but at the same time, “would raise the comparative price of labour and ameliorate the condition of the labourer”. This statement indicates that one of the most important factors for the prosperity of agriculture is the happiness of the farmers themselves, and the improvement of the quality of the lives of those who work in agriculture will ultimately result in the improvement of the food situation in England, or any other country. Otherwise, he claims that “discouragements to agriculture” would induce a great impact on the population of a country, and its effects will be much greater than that of other natural causes such as plagues.
Malthus blames the government for not offering the correct means of encouragement. In Chapter 7, he points out that the reason why the increase in the quality and quantity of agricultural products have not been achieved is because the government has failed to provide enough support, both financially and morally, to create the right environment for those who are trying to achieve this. He states that “an attempt to effect this purpose in any other way is vicious, cruel, and tyrannical, and in any state of tolerable freedom cannot therefore succeed”. He uses strong words to criticise the government for their lack of support, and urges them to act positively, before they are met with the crisis of population explosion and food shortage. In particular, he stresses out the importance of equality among all men. In Chapter 10, he describes a “paradise”, in which “all necessary labours of agriculture are shared amicably among all”. Although he is rather sceptical that such perfection would become a reality, he still argues that agriculture must benefit the poor, and those who are actually working in the industry. In Chapter 15, he states that “the increasing demand for agricultural labour must always tend to better the condition of the poor”. He claims the Industrial Revolution as responsible for the fall of the agricultural industry, and the increase in the poverty rate. He argues, as he did back in Chapter 5, that as people shifted to the manufacturing industries, which are proven to be a lot more harmful than working in the agricultural industry, the population of the working poor increased. In Chapter 16, he compares two nations, one of which focused on the improvement of agriculture, and the other put more efforts into the improvement of manufacturing. He writes that “the effect of the increase of wealth in each nation, would be extremely different”, and that in the nation which focused on modifying agriculture, “the poor would live in great plenty”, but on the other hand, those who work in the nation which focused on manufacturing “would be comparatively but little benefited”, which suggests hi strong support towards the agricultural industry, and at the same time, his negative impression on the manufacturing industry. Furthermore, in the following chapter, he calls labours related to manufacturing more “unproductive” than agriculture. He admits that manufacturing and trading is “sufficiently productive to individuals, but it certainly is not productive in the same degree to the state”. In other words, he wants to say that although manufacturing may be a decent contributor to the economy, nothing is more important than production of food, when it comes to the prosperity of the society as a whole. He believed that food is the most essential tool for survival, and as agriculture is the only source of food, no other industries should be prioritized before.
As can be seen from reading An Essay on the Principle of Population, Malthus was a keen supporter of farming and the agricultural industry. He repeatedly mentions the importance of food in a prosperous society, and the significance of agriculture which mothers these products. He strongly believed that there was a lack of attention to the importance of agriculture, and those who work in the industry were underappreciated. He urged that if the society as a whole does not realise this, the consequences of the potential explosion of the population will be overwhelmingly severe.
Corn Laws and Agricultural Protectionism
It has already become clear from the previous section that Malthus was a keen supporter of agriculture and farmers in England. However, his clear stance becomes even more apparent when reading about his views on the Corn Law.
Corn Law is a set of policies that were intended to protect the agricultural industry of Britain. The government tried to secure the positions of its domestic farmers by imposing high tariffs on imported grain products such as wheat and corn, and encouraging the consumption of domestically produced foods. Although the principles of Corn Laws were present as early as the 12th Century, it became a hot topic around the end of the 17th Century. According to Britannica, Corn Laws were caught up in a series of political debates around this time, due to the “grain shortage caused by Britain’s growing population and by the blockades imposed in the Napoleonic Wars”. As can be perceived, the Corn Laws were present mainly for the purpose of protecting the domestic agricultural sector, by imposing restriction on the imports of grain products from foreign countries. This sparked debates about the significance of the laws, with some supporting the policy by claiming that it is important to prioritize the domestic industry, rather than relying on imported foods, while others opposed to it by saying that Britain needs to rely on foreign products to a certain extent, due to the rise in the proportion of the manufacturing industry caused by the Industrial Revolution, and in order to sustain the food supplies of the nation, they have no other choice than to abolish the Corn Laws and ease the imposed restrictions.
Malthus himself was actively involved in this debate. He seemed to have the spirit of supporting the agricultural industry and the farmers, as we learned from An Essay on the Principle of Population, and it was no exception in the Corn Law debate too. He made himself very clear that Britain should put more considerations into the security of the domestic farmers. In 1814, he released Observations on the Effects of the Corn Laws, and of the Rise or Fall in the Price of Corn on the Agriculture and General Wealth of the Country (will be referred to as Observations), explaining his position. Surprisingly, Malthus does not completely disagree with the concept of free trade, stating that it is natural for humans to choose the products with the cheapest and the most steady price, and if free trade does indeed contribute to the balance of the overall prices it makes sense to adapt the method under some circumstances - “a free trade in corn would in all ordinary cases not only secure a cheaper, but a more steady, supply of grain”. He also points out an advantage of free trade of corn, stating “the foreign countries which supplied us with corn would evidently have their power of purchasing our commodities increased, and would thus contribute more effectually to our commercial and manufacturing prosperity”. He intends to say that free trade will allow Britain to not only import products, but also to export the manufactured goods, which will contribute towards the growth of the economy and the wealth of the nation. However, he quickly goes back to supporting domestic agriculture, with multiple reasons for his views. He begins by fearing the security of Britain under the assumption that Corn Laws were to be abolished and free trade was to be introduced. With a quote “It is alleged, first, that security is of still more importance than wealth, and that a great country likely to excite the jealousy of others, if its it become dependent for the support of any considerable portion of people upon foreign corn, exposes itself to the risk of having its most essential supplies suddenly fail at the time of its greatest need”, he argues that there is a great risk of relying too heavily on food products imported from abroad, and if the countries from which Britain imports corn were to be struck with a famine, the lifeline of food will be cut off immediately, which would cause a serious crisis for the nation. Therefore, he states that Britain should maintain the capacity and the sustainability to produce its own crops, so in any case of food shortages overseas, the British people would not have to suffer the severe consequences.
Malthus follows up with concerns towards the shrinkage of the agricultural industry due to the sudden industrialization of Britain. Writing “an excessive proportion of the manufacturing population does not seem favourable to national quiet and happiness”, he blames the Industrial Revolution and the increase in the size of the manufacturing industry for putting pressure on the proportions of the agricultural industry. As he mentioned in An Essay on the Principle of Population, he considers food as the most important tool for the prosperity of a society. and Britain is underestimating its qualities by heavily focusing on the development of the manufacturing industry. Although he acknowledges the significance of industrialization in the enhancement of wealth in Britain, he argues that there should be a well-balanced spectrum between manufacturing and agriculture, stating “Many of the questions both in morals and politics seem to be of the nature of the problems de maximis and minimis in fluxions; in which there is always a point where a certain effect is the greatest, while on either side of this point it gradually diminishes''. He raises his opinion that industrialization in Britain had reached beyond the point of balance with the agricultural sector, and urges for the protection of agriculture.
From the points above, Malthus evidently supports the idea of agricultural protectionism, which is an ideology that governments should protect their domestic agricultural sectors by implementing restrictions on importing foreign products. He prefers to maintain the Corn Laws, in order to keep Britain sustained on producing its own food. Malthus further explains his views on the topic in his next publication, The Grounds of an Opinion on the Policy of Restricting the Importation of Foreign Corn; intended as an Appendix to Observations on the Corn Law (will be referred to as Grounds), which was released in 1815. He mentions that if Britain was to be engaged in a free trade of corn, the wages of the labourers in Britain would fall, which would lead to a decrease in the happiness and the quality of lives of the working class. Under the principle that the value of nominal wage divided by the price of corn remains constant, if Britain was to allow the importation of foreign corn, the corn price will drop, hence the nominal wage will decrease accordingly. He claims that if free trade was introduced, the situation “would be subject to much more distressing and cruel variations”. Evidently, Malthus believes in the principles of agricultural protectionism, and he certainly does not think, at least for a time being, that abolishing the Corn Laws immediately and shifting towards free trade is a good idea. He concludes Grounds with a quote: “I firmly believe that, in the actual state of Europe, and under the actual circumstances of our present situation, it is our wisest policy to grow our own average supply of corn; and, in so doing, I feel persuaded that the country has ample resources for a great and continued increase of population, of power, of wealth, and of happiness”. Malthus firmly believes that it is wrong to start relying on foreign resources in terms of food supplies, as there are great risks that come with the potential advantages. Furthermore, he recommends that the British government should take more action to protect its domestic farmers, who have been put in a tough position since the beginning of industrialization, rather than putting even more efforts into the manufacturing industry, which have already passed the point of equilibrium with agriculture. Although he acknowledges the advantages of free trade, Malthus concluded with a set of opinions that abide with the ideologies of agricultural protectionism.
Conclusion
Throughout his publications, Thomas Robert Malthus showed his clear support towards the agricultural industry in Britain. He blames the rapid industrialization for the decrease in the attention towards the importance of agriculture. He opposes the idea of abolishing the Corn Laws, and encourages to provide more protection and support towards the labourers who are committed to farming. He stands by the ideas of agricultural protectionism, and is not so keen on replacing the original policies with the adoption of free trade. He fears with great concerns that if Britain was to allow the importation of food from foreing countries without tariffs, it would be put at a risk of encountering more issues, such as the reduction of wages due to cheaper prices of corn, and a severe crisis of food shortage, in the case of a famine in the countries that would export food to Britain. Ideally, Malthus prefers to maintain the sustainability of the food production within Britain, rather than relying on foreign resources.
References
- History - Thomas Malthus. (n.d.). Retrieved January 26, 2021, from http:www.bbc.co.ukhistoryhistoric_figuresmalthus_thomas.shtml
