and for diffusing knowledge to all the rest of mankind. But neither the law of God, nor the laws of this kingdom, will permit any man to abuse this liberty of the press, and employ it to the injury of other men. We know that the benefit of these just and equitable laws, have been frequently extended to the inhabitants of foreign kingdoms. We have seen a person punished in this kingdom for publishing a libel against the first magistrate of a neighbouring kingdom, for the purpose of persuading his subjects to rise up in rebellion against him, and overturn his government, although the person against whom this libel was published, is universally acknowledged to be the most cruel and blood-thirsty tyrant presently existing upon the face of the earth.

Seeing that men are punishable for publishing a libel in this kingdom against a foreign tyrant, and for endeavouring to overturn his government; and seeing such impious publications as this is issuing from the press with impunity, it might be asked, Is there no law in this kingdom for punishing a man for publishing a libel against the Almighty himself, and for endeavouring to seduce all the rest of mankind to join with him, for the purpose of overturning his government? It

is, however, believed, that there is at present no law for the punishment of those who are guilty of this crime. And it is perhaps right that there is not; for the Almighty himself seems to be alone competent to punish those wicked men, who thus daringly contemn his supreme authority. But if it is improper to punish men for their disbelief in the existence of the Supreme Being, and for contemning his authority, is it not as improper, and exceedingly. dangerous to the society, to permit such men to become public teachers of youth? Has not this imprudent indulgence a direct tendency to destroy the welfare and happiness of the rising generation?

The rest of this impious book would afford abundance of subjects for severe reprehension; but it would only be a repetition of these impious sentiments and contradictory language which have been already the subject of our animadversion. I shall therefore only add one or two other observations...

Mr. Malthus having set out in the beginning of his book, with an assertion, that the principle of population was the chief cause of that vice and misery, and of that unequal distribution of the bounties of nature, which at present prevails

in the world, he proposed, in the first edition of his book, to remove these evils, by persuading those who have the means of purchasing the labour of others, to withhold that purchase; for the purpose, it is supposed, of starving one half of the labouring part of mankind to death, in order to promote the happiness of those who survived, or else to deter them from marrying, and multiplying too fast. It would seem, however, that some of his friends, who possessed more common sense than himself, have shown him the extreme folly and danger of such an absurd experiment. They may, perhaps, have represented to him, that this part of mankind, whom he thus proposed to deprive of the means of subsistence, might not be altogether disposed to submit peaceably to such a privation; and since he has told them that it is equally as virtuous to take the loaves necefsary for the fubfiftence of themfelves and their families, from another man's shelf, as from their own; they might perhaps descover that, by taking the loaves from the shelf of those rich men, who had refused to purchase their labour, they could save themselves the fatigue and trouble of labouring for their bread. Be this as it may, he has in third edition, left out this wild project altoget

But he substitutes another which is equally as wild, irrationable, and impracticable. He says,

"If we be really serious in what seems to be the

66

object of general research, the mode of essentially and permanently bettering the condition "of the poor, we must explain to them the true

nature of their situation, and shew them that "the withholding the supplies of labour, is the only possible way of raising its price, and that they themselves being the possessors of this "commodity, have alone the power to do this." (Vol. 2, Pages 346 and 347.) In the first scheme those who have occasion to purchase the labour of others, are desired to withold that purchase. This we can easily perceive would have the effect by diminishing the demand for labour, of diminishing its price also; and this diminution of the price of labour, he tells us in the first edition of his book, would deter the labouring part of the community from marrying and multiplying too fast. In this improved scheme, he recommends it to the labouring part of the community, to enter into a general combination, and withold their labour from those who wish to purhase it, in order to raise its price, and until they shall agree to give them what ever price they may choose to demand. This last scheme,

however, is a direct contradiction to the professed object of his book, which is to persuade men not to marry early, left they should multiply beyond the means of fubfiftence prepared for them. For if the reduction of the price of labour by the first scheme was to have the effect of deterring men from marrying early, and increasing too fast, this general combination among the labourers, which is recommended in the second scheme, to increase the price of it, would certainly, when the purpose of it was accomplished, have a direct contrary effect; for having thus obtained an absolute power to regulate the price of labour, according to their own will and pleasure, they would be thereby naturally encouraged to marry early, and increase and multiply. This is another example of the contradictory opinions and language which this learned gentleman has made use of in the composi-, tion of this book.

In the next paragraph to that last quoted, and with which he concludes this chapter, entitled, The only effectual mode of improving the condition of the poor, he says, "I cannot but "consider this mode of diminishing poverty, as so perfectly clear in theory, and so invariably "confirmed by the analogy of every other com