“Dear Sir,—I went out of town almost immediately after I left you on Wednesday morning, and therefore did not receive your obliging letter till I arrived at Albury, whither Mr Johnson was so good as to send it.
| 322 | WILLIAM GODWIN |
“In the view in which you now place the subject, do you not in some degree change the question from the perfectibility and happiness to the numbers of the human race; and it may be a matter of doubt whether, without looking to a future state, an increase of numbers without a perpetual increase of happiness be really desirable.
“Could we suppose any country, by the most extraordinary exertions, to arrive at the ne plus ultra of subsistence and population, in one or two centuries we have reason to think that the pressure of population in its utmost weight, would be felt in frequent famines and pestilences, and particularly in the small recompense of labour; for I think you yourself must allow that under the present form of society the real recompense of labour depends upon the increase of the funds for its maintenance; and when these funds are completely stationary, and have continued so some time, this recompense will naturally be the least possible. You think that the present structure of society might be radically changed. I wish I could think so too; and as you say I have completely failed in convincing you on this subject, will you have the goodness to remove a few of those difficulties which I cannot remove myself, and allow me to be convinced by you?
“I set out with granting the extreme desirableness of the end proposed—that is, the abolition of all unnecessary labour, and the equal division of the necessary labour among all the members of the society. I ought also to premise, that in speaking of the present structure of society, I do not in the least refer to any particular form of government, but merely to the existence of a class of proprietors and a class of labourers, to the system of barter and exchange, and to the general moving principle of self-love.
“I can conceive that a period may arrive when the
baubles that at present engage the attention of the higher classes of society
may be held in contempt; but I cannot look forward to a period when such a
portion of command over the produce of land and labour as cannot be within the
reach of all will cease to be an object of desire. Moderate cloathing, moderate
houses, the power of receiving friends, the power of purchasing books, and
particularly
| LABOUR AND PROPERTY. | 323 |
“The prudence which you speak of as a check to
population implies a foresight of difficulties; and this foresight of
difficulties almost necessarily implies a desire to remove them. Can you give
me an adequate reason why the natural and general desire to remove these
difficulties would not cause such a competition as
| 324 | WILLIAM GODWIN |
“Your objection against the present form of society,
on account of its preventing the greatest practicable population, would, in
some degree, hold against your system of prudence, the object of which, as I
conceive, would be to keep the population always considerably within the means
of subsistence. Should such a system ever prevail so generally as to remove the
constant want of an increasing quantity of food, it is highly probable that
cultivation would proceed still more slowly than it does at present. I only
approve of the present form of society, because I cannot myself, according to
the laws of just theory, see any other form that can, consistently with
individual freedom, equally promote cultivation and population. Great
improvements may take place in the state of society; but I do not see how the
present form or system can be radically and essentially changed, without a
danger of relapsing again into barbarism. With the present acknowledged
imperfections of human institutions, I by no means think that the greatest part
of the distress felt in society arises from them. The very admission of the
necessity of prudence to prevent the misery from an overcharged population,
removes the blame from public institutions to the conduct of individuals. And
certain it is, that almost under the worst form of government, where there was
any tolerable freedom of competition, the race of labourers, by not marrying,
and consequently decreasing their numbers, might immediately better their
condition, and under the very best form of government, by marrying and greatly
increasing their numbers, they would immediately make their condition worse. As
all human institutions will probably be imperfect, and consequently always open
to censure, it is not surely fair to charge them with evils of which, as far as
I can judge, they are totally guiltless. And in
| MRS GODWIN, SENR., ON MARRIAGE. | 325 |
“I have made this letter much longer than I at first intended; and I certainly ought to apologise for taking up so much of your valuable time: but if your avocations will not permit you to answer it, I shall hope for some future opportunity of hearing your opinions upon the subject, when I have the pleasure of seeing you.—I am, dear sir, yours sincerely,
