An inquiry into the permanent causes of the decline and fall of powerful and wealthy nations : $b Designed to shew how the prosperity of the British empire may be prolongedPlayfair, William
Philosophy
An inquiry into the permanent causes of the decline and fall of powerful and wealthy nations : $b Designed to shew how the prosperity of the British empire may be prolonged
Playfair, William
Economics; Great Britain -- Economic conditions; History -- Philosophy
The peasants of that country lived much better than their French
neighbours; they apparently brought up their children with more ease,
and fed them more fully; but the country was not so populous, in
proportion to its fertility.
In southern climates, where the heat of the sun is great, and vegetation
difficult, unless the crop is of a nature to protect the ground from its
effects, natural grass is never luxuriant; and the cattle are neither so
large nor so fat as in more northerly latitudes. Corn, on the other hand,
which rises to a sufficient height, before the hot season, to protect the
ground from the rays of the sun, is a more profitable crop; and, indeed,
the only one that could (potatoes excepted) support a great population.
In such countries, scarcely any degree of general affluence would
enable the labouring classes to eat animal food. No degree of wealth,
that can well be supposed, would enable the inhabitants of the
southern parts of France, or of Spain, to live on butcher-meat, which,
[end of page #139] if it became to be in general demand, would be
dearer than poultry, or even than game. The absolute necessity of
living on vegetables, or rather the absolute impossibility of contracting
a habit of living on animal food, must, then, in those countries,
counteract the taste, and prevent depopulation being produced by that
cause.--But it is very different with more northerly countries, where it
is almost a matter of indifference, in point of expense, to an individual
who enjoys any degree of affluence, whether he lives on vegetable or
animal food, and where he gives a decided preference to the former.
{115}
It is probable that nature (so admirable in adapting the manners of the
inhabitants to the nature of the country) has made heavy animal food
less congenial to the taste of southern nations than to those of the
north. There is, indeed, reason to believe it is so, but, whether it is or
not, as natural philosophy is not here the study, but political economy,
the fact is, that if southern nations had the same propensity, it would
be impossible to indulge it to an equal extent.
As wealth and power are intimately connected with population, and
depend in a great measure upon it, wherever they are the cause of
introducing a taste that will, in the end, depopulate a country, they
must, in so far, undermine their own support, and bring on decay. This
is a case that applies to all northern nations, and particularly to
Britain; in order, therefore, to treat the subject at full length, it
will be better to enter into the minute examination when we come to
apply the case directly to this country, and seek for a remedy.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account