Malthus, T. R. (Thomas Robert), 1766-1834; Malthusianism
This was the question which forced itself on Captain Cook when he
visited the islands of the Pacific and Indian Oceans. Some of his
experiences there, especially in New Zealand, show that the native
population was kept down in nearly the same way as the American. Their
chief peculiarity is the extreme violence of their local feuds. The
people of every village he visited petitioned him to destroy the people
of the next, and “if I had listened to them I should have extirpated the
whole race.” A sense of human kinship is impossible at so low a level of
being; and the internecine wars of the New Zealanders were the chief
check to their numbers, which, from the distressing effects of
occasional scarcities, would seem always at the best to have been close
to the limits of the food.
The first impression of common sense is that distress is natural where
food is scanty, and unnatural where it is plentiful. But “if we turn our
eyes from the thinly-scattered inhabitants of New Zealand to the crowded
shores of Otaheite and the Society Islands” we find no such phenomenon.
“All apprehension of death seems at first sight to be banished from a
country that is described to be fruitful as the garden of the
Hesperides.” But reflection tells us that happiness and plenty are the
most powerful causes of increase. We might, therefore, expect a large
population in Otaheite; at its first start it might double itself not in
twenty-five but in fifteen years. Captain Cook estimated it (on his
second voyage in 1773) as 204,000. How could a country about one hundred
and twenty miles in circuit support an increase that doubled these
numbers in twenty-five years? Emigration is impossible, for the other
islands are in the same situation. Further cultivation is inadequate,
for scientific invention is quite wanting. The answer is that the
increase does not take place, and yet there is no miracle.
Licentiousness among the higher classes, and infanticide amongst all
classes, are freely practised. The free permission of infanticide no
doubt, as Hume remarks,[178] tends as a rule rather to increase than to
diminish population, for “by removing the terrors of too numerous a
family it would engage many people in marriage,” and such is the force
of natural affection, that comparatively few parents would carry out
their first intentions. But in Otaheite in its old state custom had made
infanticide easy, and it was a real check. War against other islands was
a third check, frequently destroying the food as well as the people,
thus striking down two generations at once. All these checks
notwithstanding, the population was up to the level of the food, and
there was as much scarcity and keen distress as on any barren island.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account