第27章

Milluponthismatterdissentedmostemphaticallybothfromthe’classical’andthehistoricalchampion。Thepointiswithhimofvitalimportance。HisFrenchsympathieshadpreparedhimtoseetheothersideofthequestion。Themostunequivocaltriumphclaimed，withwhatevertruth，fortheFrenchrevolutionwastheelevationofthecultivatorsoftheland。Mill，atanyrate，heldemphaticallythattheFrenchrevolutionhad’extinguishedextremepovertyforonewholegeneration，’(52*)andhadtherebyenabledtheFrenchpopulationtorisepermanentlytoahigherlevel。ContemporaryEnglishhistorygavetheotherside。

Poor-lawcontroversieshadbroughtintostrikingreliefthedegradationoftheEnglishagriculturallabourer。TheMorningChroniclearticles，towhichhehaddevotedsixmonths，combinedwithanadvocacyofpeasant-proprietorshipanexpositionoftheinadequacyofpoor-laws。TheexcellentW。T。Thornton(1813-1880)

hadbeenfrom1836Mill’scolleagueintheIndiaHouse，andwasoneofthefewfriendswhocommunicatedfreelywithhimduringhisseclusion。(53*)In1846ThorntonpublishedabookuponOverPopulationanditsRemedy，inwhichhedeclareshimselftobeathoroughgoingMalthusian，andrebukesM’CullochforsayingthatMalthus’sworkexemplifiedthe’abuse’ofgeneralprinciples。

Thornton，likeMill，followsMalthusinthinkingthatover-populationmustbecheckedbypreventingimprudentmarriages；(54*)buthemakesaspecialpointofthedoctrinethatmiseryisnotonlytheeffectbutthe’principalpromoter’ofover-population。(55*)HenceheisnotcontentwithMalthus’snegativeposition。Theevilwillnotdieoutofitself。Hisfavouriteremedyatthistimewasthe’allotmentsystem。’FromthisMilldissents。(56*)Theyagree，however，uponthemeritsofpeasant-proprietorship，uponwhichThorntonpublishedabookin1848，shortlybeforetheappearanceofMill’streatise。(57*)Millsaysthatthisoughttobethestandardtreatiseonthatside’ofthequestion。’(58*)NeitherMillnorThorntonhadanyfirsthandknowledgeofagriculture；buttheyforciblyattackedtheassumptionsthenprevalentamongEnglishagriculturists。ThorntonhadbeenespeciallyimpressedbytheprosperityoftheChannelIslands——aratherlimitedbaseforawideinduction；butbothheandMillcouldrefertoexperienceonamuchlargerscalethroughoutwidedistrictsontheContinent。ThepithofMill’spositioniscondensedinMichelet’spicturesquepassage，wherethepeasantisdescribedasunabletotearhimselfawayevenonSundayfromthecontemplationofhisbelovedplotofland。Thethreeperiodswhenthepeasanthadbeenabletobuylandwerecalledthe’goodKingLouisXII，’the’goodKingHenryIV’andtherevolution。ArthurYoung’sfamousphraseofthe’magicofproperty’which’turnssandtogold’wasastillmoreeffectivetestimony，becauseYoungwastheCoryphaeusofthemodern，Englishschoolofagriculturists。’(59*)

France，then，representedthegoodeffectsofMalthusianisminaction。TheFrenchpeasantry，asThorntonsaysafterLavergne，(60*)hadnotreadMalthus，buttheyinstinctivelyputhisadviceinpractice。MilltriumphantlyquotesthefigureswhichshowedtheslowrateofincreaseoftheFrenchpopulation。(61*)ThecaseofBelgium，asheremarks，showedthatpeasant-proprietorshipmightbeconsistentwitharapidincrease，buttheFrenchcaseprovedconclusivelythatthiswasnotanecessaryresultofthesystem。The’pauper-warren’theoryatleastisconclusivelydisproved。M’Culloch’sunfortunatepredictionmightbeexplainedbyhisaprioritendencies；butitiscurioustofindMillconfutingJones，theadvocateforahistoricalmethod，byanappealtoexperienceandstatistics。Thepossessionofthesoundestmethoddoesnotmakeamaninfallible。

JonesandM’Culloch，asMillsaid，hadconfoundedtwoessentiallydifferentthings。Theyhadarguedsimplyastotheeconomicadvantagesofproductiononalargeandsmallscalewithoutreferencetothemoraleffectuponthecultivator。Theircriterionissimplythegreatnessofthereturntoagivenamountofcapitalondifferentsystems。TheyhadthereforetreatedthecasesofFranceandIrelandasidentical，whereasinonevitalcircumstancetheyarean