We can never contemplate human society in its origin. We must contem plate it in its progress and development. All theories as to how man began to pro pagate and gain the means of subsistence are useless towards the solution of any problem that concerns his condition. We know this, and no more : at any given time, and in any given state of society, there is a certain population which subsists in a certain mode by and out of the means of subsistence which it then has ; and these means are partly the product and accumulation of the actual generation, and partly the ac cumulation of their progenitors. If the means of subsistence (thus understood) of that population are sufficient, and no more than sufficient, any increase of the population must be preceded by increased labour, or by labour rendered more pro ductive. We cannot suppose the popula tion to increase first, and then the ad ditional means of subsistence to be produced; for by the supposition the actual population has only sufficient, and that which is " increase " must be fed out of some other store; and by the supposi tion, there is no other store.
If it is said that children may be born and are often born, before the means of subsistence, the "revenue of the whole society," has been increased, the answer is that they either die before they have partaken of the then existing means of subsistence, and therefore they are no " increase " of population ; or they do live to partake of the general revenue, of the then existing means of subsistence, in which case it must be admitted that population has increased without an in crease of the whole means of subsistence; hut the consequence is that the average portion of the general revenue which each person gets is less than it was before.
The fact is, that in some countries the means of subsistence are barely sufficient for the existence of the actual popula tion ; in others they are more than barely sufficient. In the former case there can be no real increase of population, in the sense in which increase has just been ex plained, until there has first been an ac tual increase in the means of subsistence ; in the latter case there may be an increase of the population before there is an in crease of the means of subsistence, and this increase of population may go on without any increase in the means of sub sistence, until the people have reached the lowest limit of subsistence in con sequence of each man's share of the general revenue being diminished.
It is clear then that the " means of sub sistence" (as above explained) must be first, and increase of population may then follow, and generally does follow to the full amount of these increased means of subsistence ; and further, population may and sometimes does increase beyond the amount of such increased means, but it is then of necessity checked by actual suffering in the whole or in a part of the society. And this, we conceive, is the meaning of Mr. Malthus's proposition.
There seems to be an error (or rather, looseness of expression in most writers) in the mode of comparing the rate of in crease of the two things, "means of sub sistence " and "population." There can
be no useful comparison of the rate of in crease between these two things except this: a given population may attain its increase, which is proportionate to the antecedent increased means of subsistence, in a less time than these increased means of subsistence were produced ; or it may take a longer time. There is also no question about a tendency to increase either in the one thing or the other; the question is about an actual increase, which can only take place under the coa 1 ditions already stated.
The question is perplexed, and its true statement rendered difficult by the fact that an increase of the whole means of subsistence and an increase of the popula tion may be, and generally are, going on at the same time ; and it seems to have been supposed that this increase of population, during a given time, is owing to the then increasing means of subsist ence. But this cannot be true if it shall be admitted that a given amount of population cannot be increased, unless the actual amount of the means of sub sistence of that population is first in creased, or, which is the same thing, the rate of living is reduced. If some writers on this subject have not meant what is here imputed to them, they have certainly not sufficiently guarded them selves against the imputation.
There is still another consideration which perplexes the question. For very short periods it is certainly conceivable, and it is very probably the ease, that sometimes population is increasing (in a certain sense) at a faster rate than the means of subsistence ; that is, taking short intervals, it will or may be found that the population, during such inter vals, has outstripped the means of sub sistence existing at the end of such in tervals, and a part of it must therefore die. These deaths consequently take place either in the whole population, or among those whose means of subsistence are reduced ; for some parts of the com munity may and do enjoy, under such circumstances, as much as they did be fore, while others do not. In practice, a deficient allowance is not distributed among all, but some suffer and others do not. But on the other hand it is con ceivable, and it may be true, that for short intervals the means of subsistence may sometimes be increasing more rapidly than the contemporaneous in crease of population ; that is, the actual population may possess and be producing and accumulating the means of subsist ence more than sufficient for the susten tation of themselves and of the addition to the population made during the time of such production and accumulation. Now this is certainly the fact in many societies, as to part of the society ; one part is producing and accumulating more than is necessary for the increase of the population which it is producing ; this is the case with many of the middle classes in all industrious communities. At the same time another class is in creasing its population at a greater rate than the means of subsistence applicable to such increase : the check to such an increase is obvious. There is no reason why this may not be true of a whole population, as it is of a part.