« PreviousContinue »
Then nature was my kingdom; and I stood
Rich in the wealth of all beneath the pole ;
Awaked the transport of my soul.
And ice-flakes melted from the green-tipp'd spray; How rich the change ! what magic hues were shed
On tribes of flowers that laugh'd in day !
Thou heldst high festival: thy storms arose,
of hail-blasts, hurricanes, and snows. How have I loved to see the radiance run
O'er the calm ocean from an azure sky;
Gaze down with burning eye!
Thy waves, O sea! rolld gathering from afar;
As storm-lash'd surges strove in war.
My love has sought thee in the musing hour ;
Thy fir-tree depths my shadowing bower. How, when I saw thy lofty scenes unfold,
My soul sprang forth, transported at the sight!
And bore me up from height to height:
Where resting clouds had check'd their soaring pride, And my foot seem'd in hovering speed to vye
With eagles swooping at my side.
Thy pencild outlines desolate and grand !
Beneath my re-creating hand.
Those days so beautiful, when the bright flame
The noble pang of fame.
EXTRACT FROM THE GENIUS OF MAN.
“ But how compute th’immeasurable height Of Nature's Ruler, thy great infinite? And must we own a Power, that lives through space, Which thought can ne'er conceive nor spirit trace ? Chance has created all: th'eternal mould Of matter bade the link'd effects unfold: End, principle, and midst of all the whole Not God but Nature is the ruling soul. She, unexhausted, rests not, grows not old, Still born anew and round her endless circle rolld.” -Yes -- powerful God! thou Being without bound ! I feel thy dread immensity confound My trembling powers: thy essence soars above My reach of thought: yet may my grateful love
Dispense the night that shrouds thy majesty,
Obscure blasphemer! can thy scoffs exclude
O ye, who make a faith in God your scorn,
God in awful banishment depart,
Lord of his lot, 'tis man alone who dies,
Whatever social ills may press us round,
MEASURE OF VALUE.
To the reader. This article was written and printed before the author heard of the
lamented death of Mr. Ricardo.
It is remarkable at first sight that which until his time had been a barren Mr. Malthus, to whom Political Eco- truism, and showed that it teemed with nomy is so much indebted in one
Out of this position chapter (viz. the chapter of Popula- --That in the ground which limited lation), should in every other chap- human food lay the ground which liter have stumbled at every step. On mited human increase—united with a nearer view, however, the wonder this other position—That there is a
His failures and his errors perpetual nisus in the principle of pohave arisen in all cases from the illo- pulation to pass that limit, he unfolded gical structure of his understanding; a body of most important corollaries. his success was in a path which re I have remarked in another article on quired no logic. What is the brief this subject-how entirely these corolabstract of his success? It is this: laries had escaped all Mr. Malthus's* he took an obvious and familiar truth, predecessors in the same track. Per
* In a slight article on Mr. Malthus, lately published, I omitted to take any notice of the recent controversy between this gentleman -Mr. Godwin_and Mr. Booth ; my reason for which was-that I have not yet found time to read it. But, if Mr. Lowe has rightly represented this principle of Mr. Booth's argument in his late work on the Statistics of England, it is a most erroneous one: for Mr. Booth is there described as alleging against Mr. Malthus that, in his view of the tendencies of the principle of population, he has relied too much on the case of the United States—which Mr. Booth will have to be an ex. treme case, and not according to the general rule. But of what consequence is this to Mr. Malthus ? And how is he interested in relying on the case of America rather than that of the oldest European country? Because he assumes a perpetual nisus in the principle of human increase to pass a certain limit, he does not therefore hold that this limit ever is passed either in the new countries or in old (or only for a moment, and inevitably to be thrown back within it). Let this limit be placed where it may, it can no more be passed in America than in Europe; and America is not at all more favourable to Mr. Malthus's theory than Europe. Births, it must be remembered, are more in excess in Europe than in America: though they do not make so much positive addition to the population.
haps the most striking instance of guide at the sad bewilderment into this, which I could have alleged, is which they have both strayed. It tends that of the celebrated French work much to heighten the sense of Mr.
-“ L'Ami des Hommes, ou Traité Malthus's helplessness in this partide la Population,” (written about the cular point-that of late years he has middle of the last century) which given himself the air too much of sets out deliberately from this prin- teazing Mr. Ricardo, one of the ciple, expressed almost in the very “ugliest customers” in point of logic words of Mr. Malthus, -" Que la that ever entered the ring. Mr. Ricarmésure de la Subsistance est celle de la do is a most “ dangerous” man; and Population ;”-beats the bushes in Mr. Malthus would do well not to every direction about it; and yet meddle with so “ vicioue” a subject, (with the exception of one corollary whose arm (like Neate's) gives a on the supposed depopulating ten- blow like the kick of a horse. He dency of war and famine) deduces has hitherto contented himself very from it none but erroneous and Anti- goodnaturedly with gently laying Malthusian doctrines. That from a Mr. Malthus on his back ; but, if he truth apparently so barren any corol- should once turn round with a serious laries were deducible-was reserved determination to “ take the conceit" for Mr. Malthus to show. As corol- out of him, Mr. Malthus would aslaries, it may be supposed that they suredly be « put into chancery,” and imply a logical act of the understand- suffer a “ punishment” that must ing. In some small degree, no doubt; distress his friends.--Amongst those but no more than necessarily accom whom Mr. Malthus has perplexed by panies every exercise of reason. his logic, I am not one : in matter of Though inferences, they are not re- logic, I hold myself impeccable; and, mote inferences, but immediate and to say nothing of my sober days, I proximate; and not dependent upon defy the devil and all the powers of each other, but collateral. Not lo- darkness to get any advantage over gic but a judicious choice of his me, even on those days when I am ground placed Mr. Malthus at once drunk, in relation to · Barbara, Cein a station from which he command- larent, Darii, or Ferio.” ed the whole truth at a glance-with “ Avoid, old Satanas !" I exclaim, a lucky dispensation from all neces- if any man attempts to fling dust in sity of continuous logical processes. my eyes by false syllogism, or any But such a dispensation is a privilege mode of dialectic sophism. And in indulged to few other parts of Politie relation to this particular subject of cal Economy, and least of all to that value, I flatter myself that in a pawhich is the foundation of all Politi- per expressly applied to the exposure cal Economy, viz. the doctrine of of Mr. Malthus's blunders in his Povalue. Having therefore repeatedly litical Economy, I have made it chosen to tamper with this difficult impossible for Mr. Malthus, even subject, Mr. Malthus has just made though he should take to his assistso many exposures of his intellectual
ance seven worse logicians than himinfirmities—which, but for this vo- self, to put down my light with their lunteer display, we might never have darkness. Meantime, as a labour of known. Of all the men of talents, shorter compass, I will call the readwhose writings I have read up to er's attention to the following blunder, this hour, Mr. Malthus has the most in a later work of Mr. Malthus's perplexed understanding. He is not viz. a pamphlet of 80 pages, entitled, only confused himself, but is the “ The Measure of Value, stated and cause that confusion is in other men. applied,” (published in the spring of Logical perplexity is shockingly con- the present year).. The question tagious: and he, who takes Mr. Mal- proposed in this work is the same as thus for his guide through any tan- that already discussed in his Political gled question, ought to be able to Economy-viz. What is the measure box the compass very well; or before of value? But the answer to it is he has read 10 pages he will find different: in the Political Economy, himself (as the Westmorland guides the measure of value was determined express it) “maffled,”—and disposed to be a mean between com and lato sit down and fall a crying with his bour; in this pamphlet, Mr. Mal
thus retracts that opinion, and other words, what caused the race(finally, let us hope) setiles it to his course to be this length rather than own satisfaction that the true mea- another length: but, if the answer sure is labour; not the quantity of were" An actual
admeasurelabour, observe, which will produce ment," it would then be plain X, but the quantity which X will that by the word “ determined,” I command. Upon these two answers, had been understood to mean “ deand the delusions which lie at their termined subjectively,” i. e. in relaroot, I shall here forbear to com tion to our knowledge;what ascerment; because I am now chasing tained it ?-Now, in the objective Mr. Malthus's bogical blunders; and sense of the phrase “ determiner of these delusions are not so much lo- value,” the measure of value will gical as economic: what I now wish mean the ground of value: in the subthe reader to attend tomis the blun- jective sense, it will mean the cris der involved in the question itself; terion of value. Mr. Malthus will because that blunder is not economic, allege that he is at liberty to use it but logical. The question is—what in which sense he pleases. Grant is the measure of value? I say then that he is, but not therefore in both. that the phrase—“ measure of value” Has he then used it in both? He will, is an equivocal phrase ; and, in Mr. perhaps, deny that he has, and will Malthus's use of it, means indiffer- contend that he has used it in the ently that which determines value, in latter sense as equivalent to the asa relation to the principium essendi, and certainer or criterion of value. I that which determines value, in rela- answer—No: for, omitting a more tion to the principium cognoscendi. particular examination of his use in Here, perhaps, the reader will ex this place, I say that his use of any claim“ Avoid, Satanas !” to me, word is peremptorily and in defiance falsely supposing that I have some of his private explanation to be exdesign upon his eyes, and wish to torted from the use of the corresblind them with learned dust. But, ponding term in him whom he is opif he thinks that, he is in the wrong posing. Now he is opposing Mr. box: I must and will express scho- Ricardo: his labour which X come lastic notions by scholastic phrases; mands—is opposed to Mr. Ricardo's but, having once done this, I am quantity of labour which will produce. then ready to descend into the arena X. Call the first A, the last B. with no other weapons than plain Now, in making B the determiner of English can furnish. Let us there- value, Mr. Ricardo means that B is fore translate " measure of value” the ground of value: i. e. that B is into “ that which determines value:” the answer to the question—what and, in this shape, we shall detect makes this hat of more value than the ambiguity of which I complain. this pair of shoes ? But, if Mr. MalFor I say, that the word deter- thus means by A the same thing, mines may be taken subjectively for then by his own confession he has what determines X in relation to our used the term measure of value in two knowledge, or objectively for what senses : on the other hand, if he does determines X in relation to itself. not mean the same thing, but simply Thus, if I were to ask — " what de- the criterion of value, then he has termined the length of the race not used the word in any sense which course?” And the answer were opposes him to Mr. Ricardo. And “ The convenience of the spectators yet he advances the whole on that who could not have seen the horses at footing. On either ground, therefore, a greater distance,” or “ The choice he is guilty of a logical error, which of the subscribers," then it is plain implies that, so far from answering that by the word “ determined,” I his own question, he did not know was understood to mean “ deter- what his own question was. mined objectively," i. e. in relation
X. Y. Z. to the existence of the object; in