- 歡迎訪問欣可小說小說網
-
桌麵快捷
-
加入收藏
-
設為首頁
桌麵快捷
加入收藏
設為首頁
From
the
movement
of
population
and
the
agricultural
produce
of
Ireland,
we
pass
to
the
movement
in
the
purse
of
its
landlords,
larger
farmers,and
industrial
capitalists.
It
is
reflected
in
the
rise
and
fall
of
the
Income-tax.
It
may
be
remembered
that
Schedule
D.
(profits
with
the
exception
of
those
of
farmers),
includes
also
the
so-called,
\"professional\"profits
–
i.e.,
the
incomes
of
lawyers,
doctors,
&c.;
and
the
Schedules
C.
and
E.,
in
which
no
special
details
are
given,
include
the
incomes
of
employees,
officers,State
sinecurists,
State
fundholders,
&c.
121
Under
Schedule
D.,
the
average
annual
increase
of
income
from
1853-1864
was
only
0.93;
whilst,
in
the
same
period,
in
Great
Britain,
it
was
4.58.
The
following
table
shows
the
distribution
of
the
profits(with
the
exception
of
those
of
farmers)
for
the
years
1864
and
1865:
–
122
England,
a
country
with
fully
developed
capitalist
production,
and
pre-eminently
industrial,
would
have
bled
to
death
with
such
a
drain
of
population
as
Ireland
has
suffered.
But
Ireland
is
at
present
only
an
agricultural
district
of
England,
marked
off
by
a
wide
channel
from
the
country
to
which
it
yields
corn,wool,
cattle,
industrial
and
military
recruits.
The
depopulation
of
Ireland
has
thrown
much
of
the
land
out
of
cultivation,
has
greatly
diminished
the
produce
of
the
soil,123and,
in
spite
of
the
greater
area
devoted
to
cattle
breeding,
has
brought
about,
in
some
of
its
branches,
an
absolute
diminution,
in
others,
an
advance
scarcely
worthy
of
mention,
and
constantly
interrupted
by
retrogressions.
Nevertheless,
with
the
fall
in
numbers
of
the
population,
rents
and
farmers'profits
rose,
although
the
latter
not
as
steadily
as
the
former.
The
reason
of
this
is
easily
comprehensible.On
the
one
hand,
with
the
throwing
of
small
holdings
into
large
ones,
and
the
change
of
arable
into
pasture
land,
a
larger
part
of
the
whole
produce
was
transformed
into
surplus-produce.
The
surplus-produce
increased,
although
the
total
produce,
of
which
it
formed
a
fraction,
decreased.
On
the
other
hand,
the
money
value
of
this
surplus-produce
increased
yet
more
rapidly
than
its
mass,
in
consequence
of
the
rise
in
the
English
market
price
of
meat,
wool,
&c.,
during
the
last
20,
and
especially
during
the
last
10,
years.
The
scattered
means
of
production
that
serve
the
producers
themselves
as
means
of
employment
and
of
subsistence,
without
expanding
their
own
value
by
the
incorporation
of
the
labour
of
others,
are
no
more
capital
than
a
product
consumed
by
its
own
producer
is
a
commodity.
If,
with
the
mass
of
the
population,
that
of
the
means
of
production
employed
in
agriculture
also
diminished,
the
mass
of
the
capital
employed
in
agriculture
increased,
because
a
part
of
the
means
of
production
that
were
formerly
scattered,was
concentrated
and
turned
into
capital.
The
total
capital
of
Ireland
outside
agriculture,
employed
in
industry
and
trade,
accumulated
during
the
last
two
decades
slowly,
and
with
great
and
constantly
recurring
fluctuations;
so
much
the
more
rapidly
did
the
concentration
of
its
individual
constituents
develop.
And,
however
small
its
absolute
increase,
in
proportion
to
the
dwindling
population
it
had
increased
largely.
Here,
then,
under
our
own
eyes
and
on
a
large
scale,
a
process
is
revealed,
than
which
nothing
more
excellent
could
be
wished
for
by
orthodox
economy
for
the
support
of
its
dogma:
that
misery
springs
from
absolute
surplus
population,
and
that
equilibrium
is
re-established
by
depopulation.
This
is
a
far
more
important
experiment
than
was
the
plague
in
the
middle
of
the
14th
century
so
belauded
of
Malthusians.Note
further:
If
only
the
naveté
of
the
schoolmaster
could
apply,
to
the
conditions
of
production
and
population
of
the
nineteenth
century,
the
standard
of
the
14th,
this
naveté,
into
the
bargain,
overlooked
the
fact
that
whilst,
after
the
plague
and
the
decimation
that
accompanied
it,
followed
on
this
side
of
the
Channel,
in
England,
enfranchisement
and
enrichment
of
the
agricultural
population,
on
that
side,
in
France,followed
greater
servitude
and
more
misery.124
The
Irish
famine
of
1846
killed
more
than
1,000,000
people,
but
it
killed
poor
devils
only.
To
the
wealth
of
the
country
it
did
not
the
slightest
damage.
The
exodus
of
the
next
20
years,
an
exodus
still
constantly
increasing,
did
not,
as,
e.g.,
the
Thirty
Years'
War,decimate,
along
with
the
human
beings,
their
means
of
production.
Irish
genius
discovered
an
altogether
new
way
of
spiriting
a
poor
people
thousands
of
miles
away
from
the
scene
of
its
misery.
The
exiles
transplanted
to
the
United
States,
send
home
sums
of
money
every
year
as
travelling
expenses
for
those
left
behind.
Every
troop
that
emigrates
one
year,
draws
another
after
it
the
next.
Thus,
instead
of
costing
Ireland
anything,
emigration
forms
one
of
the
most
lucrative
branches
of
its
export
trade.
Finally,
it
is
a
systematic
process,
which
does
not
simply
make
a
passing
gap
in
the
population,
but
sucks
out
of
it
every
year
more
people
than
are
replaced
by
the
births,
so
that
the
absolute
level
of
the
population
falls
year
by
year.
125
What
were
the
consequences
for
the
Irish
labourers
left
behind
and
freed
from
the
surplus
population
That
the
relative
surplus
population
is
today
as
great
as
before
1846;
that
wages
are
just
as
low,
that
the
oppression
of
the
labourers
has
increased,
that
misery
is
forcing
the
country
towards
a
new
crisis.
The
facts
are
simple.
The
revolution
in
agriculture
has
kept
pace
with
emigration.The
production
of
relative
surplus
population
has
more
than
kept
pace
with
the
absolute
depopulation.A
glance
at
table
C.
shows
that
the
change
of
arable
to
pasture
land
must
work
yet
more
acutely
in
Ireland
than
in
England.
In
England
the
cultivation
of
green
crops
increases
with
the
breeding
of
cattle;
in
Ireland,it
decreases.
Whilst
a
large
number
of
acres,
that
were
formerly
tilled,
lie
idle
or
are
turned
permanently
into
grass-land,
a
great
part
of
the
waste
land
and
peat
bogs
that
were
unused
formerly,
become
of
service
for
the
extension
of
cattle-breeding.
The
smaller
and
medium
farmers
–
I
reckon
among
these
all
who
do
not
cultivate
more
than
100
acres
–
still
make
up
about
8\/10ths
of
the
whole
number.126They
are
one
after
the
other,
and
with
a
degree
of
force
unknown
before,
crushed
by
the
competition
of
an
agriculture
managed
by
capital,and
therefore
they
continually
furnish
new
recruits
to
the
class
of
wage
labourers.
The
one
great
industry
of
Ireland,
linen-manufacture,
requires
relatively
few
adult
men
and
only
employs
altogether,
in
spite
of
its
expansion
since
the
price
of
cotton
rose
in
1861-1866,a
comparatively
insignificant
part
of
the
population.Like
all
other
great
modern
industries,
it
constantly
produces,
by
incessant
fluctuations,
a
relative
surplus
population
within
its
own
sphere,
even
with
an
absolute
increase
in
the
mass
of
human
beings
absorbed
by
it.The
misery
of
the
agricultural
population
forms
the
pedestal
for
gigantic
shirt-factories,
whose
armies
of
labourers
are,
for
the
most
part,
scattered
over
the
country.
Here,
we
encounter
again
the
system
described
above
of
domestic
industry,
which
in
underpayment
and
overwork,
possesses
its
own
systematic
means
for
creating
supernumerary
labourers.
Finally,
although
the
depopulation
has
not
such
destructive
consequences
as
would
result
in
a
country
with
fully
developed
capitalistic
production,
it
does
not
go
on
without
constant
reaction
upon
the
home-market.
The
gap
which
emigration
causes
here,
limits
not
only
the
local
demand
for
labour,
but
also
the
incomes
of
small
shopkeepers,artisans,
tradespeople
generally.
Hence
the
diminution
in
incomes
between
￡60
and
￡100
in
Table
E.
A
clear
statement
of
the
condition
of
the
agricultural
labourers
in
Ireland
is
to
be
found
in
the
Reports
of
the
Irish
Poor
Law
Inspectors
(1870).
127Officials
of
a
government
which
is
maintained
only
by
bayonets
and
by
a
state
of
siege,
now
open,
now
disguised,they
have
to
observe
all
the
precautions
of
language
that
their
colleagues
in
England
disdain.
In
spite
of
this,
however,
they
do
not
let
their
government
cradle
itself
in
illusions.
According
to
them
the
rate
of
wages
in
the
country,
still
very
low,
has
within
the
last
20
years
risen
50-60
per
cent.,
and
stands
now,on
the
average,
at
6s.
to
9s.
per
week.
But
behind
this
apparent
rise,
is
hidden
an
actual
fall
in
wages,
for
it
does
not
correspond
at
all
to
the
rise
in
price
of
the
necessary
means
of
subsistence
that
has
taken
place
in
the
meantime.
For
proof,
the
following
extract
from
the
official
accounts
of
an
Irish
workhouse.
The
price
of
the
necessary
means
of
subsistence
is
therefore
fully
twice,
and
that
of
clothing
exactly
twice,
as
much
as
they
were
20
years
before.
Even
apart
from
this
disproportion,
the
mere
comparison
of
the
rate
of
wages
expressed
in
gold
would
give
a
result
far
from
accurate.
Before
the
famine,
the
great
mass
of
agricultural
wages
were
paid
in
kind,
only
the
smallest
part
in
money;
today,payment
in
money
is
the
rule.
From
this
it
follows
that,
whatever
the
amount
of
the
real
wage,
its
money
rate
must
rise.
\"Previous
to
the
famine,
the
labourer
enjoyed
his
cabin
...
with
a
rood,
or
half-acre
or
acre
of
land,and
facilities
for
...
a
crop
of
potatoes.
He
was
able
to
rear
his
pig
and
keep
fowl....
But
they
now
have
to
buy
bread,
and
they
have
no
refuse
upon
which
they
can
feed
a
pig
or
fowl,
and
they
have
consequently
no
benefit
from
the
sale
of
a
pig,fowl,
or
eggs.\"128
In
fact,
formerly,
the
agricultural
labourers
were
but
the
smallest
of
the
small
farmers,
and
formed
for
the
most
part
a
kind
of
rear-guard
of
the
medium
and
large
farms
on
which
they
found
employment.
Only
since
the
catastrophe
of
1846
have
they
begun
to
form
a
fraction
of
the
class
of
purely
wage
labourers,
a
special
class,
connected
with
its
wage-masters
only
by
monetary
relations.
We
know
what
were
the
conditions
of
their
dwellings
in
1846.
Since
then
they
have
grown
yet
worse.
A
part
of
the
agricultural
labourers,
which,however,
grows
less
day
by
day,
dwells
still
on
the
holdings
of
the
farmers
in
over-crowded
huts,
whose
hideousness
far
surpasses
the
worst
that
the
English
agricultural
labourers
offered
us
in
this
way.
And
this
holds
generally
with
the
exception
of
certain
tracts
of
Ulster;
in
the
south,
in
the
counties
of
Cork,
Limerick,Kilkenny,
&c.;
in
the
east,
in
Wicklow,
Wexford,
&c.;in
the
centre
of
Ireland,
in
King's
and
Queen's
County,Dublin,
&c.;
in
the
west,
in
Sligo,
Roscommon,
Mayo,Galway,
&c.
\"The
agricultural
labourers'
huts,\"
an
inspector
cries
out,
\"are
a
disgrace
to
the
Christianity
and
to
the
civilisation
of
this
country.\"
129
In
order
to
increase
the
attractions
of
these
holes
for
the
labourers,
the
pieces
of
land
belonging
thereto
from
time
immemorial,
are
systematically
confiscated.
\"The
mere
sense
that
they
exist
subject
to
this
species
of
ban,
on
the
part
of
the
landlords
and
their
agents,
has
...
given
birth
in
the
minds
of
the
labourers
to
corresponding
sentiments
of
antagonism
and
dissatisfaction
towards
those
by
whom
they
are
thus
led
to
regard
themselves
as
being
treated
as
...
a
proscribed
race.\"
130
The
first
act
of
the
agricultural
revolution
was
to
sweep
away
the
huts
situated
on
the
field
of
labour.This
was
done
on
the
largest
scale,
and
as
if
in
obedience
to
a
command
from
on
high.
Thus
many
labourers
were
compelled
to
seek
shelter
in
villages
and
towns.
There
they
were
thrown
like
refuse
into
garrets,
holes,
cellars
and
corners,
in
the
worst
back
slums.
Thousands
of
Irish
families,
who
according
to
the
testimony
of
the
English,
eaten
up
as
these
are
with
national
prejudice,
are
notable
for
their
rare
attachment
to
the
domestic
hearth,
for
their
gaiety
and
the
purity
of
their
home-life,
found
themselves
suddenly
transplanted
into
hotbeds
of
vice.
The
men
are
now
obliged
to
seek
work
of
the
neighbouring
farmers
and
are
only
hired
by
the
day,
and
therefore
under
the
most
precarious
form
of
wage.
Hence
\"they
sometimes
have
long
distances
to
go
to
and
from
work,
often
get
wet,
and
suffer
much
hardship,
not
unfrequently
ending
in
sickness,disease
and
want.\"
131
\"The
towns
have
had
to
receive
from
year
to
year
what
was
deemed
to
be
the
surplus
labour
of
the
rural
division;\"132and
then
people
still
wonder
\"there
is
still
a
surplus
of
labour
in
the
towns
and
villages,
and
either
a
scarcity
or
a
threatened
scarcity
in
some
of
the
country
divisions.\"133The
truth
is
that
this
want
only
becomes
perceptible\"in
harvest-time,
or
during
spring,
or
at
such
times
as
agricultural
operations
are
carried
on
with
activity;
at
other
periods
of
the
year
many
hands
are
idle;\"134that
\"from
the
digging
out
of
the
main
crop
of
potatoes
in
October
until
the
early
spring
following
...
there
is
no
employment
for
them;\"
135and
further,
that
during
the
active
times
they\"are
subject
to
broken
days
and
to
all
kinds
of
interruptions.\"136
These
results
of
the
agricultural
revolution
–
i.e.,the
change
of
arable
into
pasture
land,
the
use
of
machinery,
the
most
rigorous
economy
of
labour,
&c.,are
still
further
aggravated
by
the
model
landlords,who,
instead
of
spending
their
rents
in
other
countries,condescend
to
live
in
Ireland
on
their
demesnes.
In
order
that
the
law
of
supply
and
demand
may
not
be
broken,
these
gentlemen
draw
their
\"labour-supply
...
chiefly
from
their
small
tenants,
who
are
obliged
to
attend
when
required
to
do
the
landlord's
work,
at
rates
of
wages,
in
many
instances,
considerably
under
the
current
rates
paid
to
ordinary
labourers,
and
without
regard
to
the
inconvenience
or
loss
to
the
tenant
of
being
obliged
to
neglect
his
own
business
at
critical
periods
of
sowing
or
reaping.\"
137
The
uncertainty
and
irregularity
of
employment,
the
constant
return
and
long
duration
of
gluts
of
labour,
all
these
symptoms
of
a
relative
surplus
population,
figure
therefore
in
the
reports
of
the
Poor
Law
administration,as
so
many
hardships
of
the
agricultural
proletariat.It
will
be
remembered
that
we
met,
in
the
English
agricultural
proletariat,
with
a
similar
spectacle.
But
the
difference
is
that
in
England,
an
industrial
country,the
industrial
reserve
recruits
itself
from
the
country
districts,
whilst
in
Ireland,
an
agricultural
country,
the
agricultural
reserve
recruits
itself
from
the
towns,
the
cities
of
refuge
of
the
expelled
agricultural
labourers.In
the
former,
the
supernumeraries
of
agriculture
are
transformed
into
factory
operatives;
in
the
latter,those
forced
into
the
towns,
whilst
at
the
same
time
they
press
on
the
wages
in
towns,
remain
agricultural
labourers,
and
are
constantly
sent
back
to
the
country
districts
in
search
of
work.
The
official
inspectors
sum
up
the
material
condition
of
the
agricultural
labourer
as
follows:
\"Though
living
with
the
strictest
frugality,
his
own
wages
are
barely
sufficient
to
provide
food
for
an
ordinary
family
and
pay
his
rent\"
and
he
depends
upon
other
sources
for
the
means
of
clothing
himself,
his
wife,
and
children....
The
atmosphere
of
these
cabins,
combined
with
the
other
privations
they
are
subjected
to,
has
made
this
class
particularly
susceptible
to
low
fever
and
pulmonary
consumption.\"
138
After
this,
it
is
no
wonder
that,
according
to
the
unanimous
testimony
of
the
inspectors,
a
sombre
discontent
runs
through
the
ranks
of
this
class,
that
they
long
for
the
return
of
the
past,
loathe
the
present,despair
of
the
future,
give
themselves
up
\"to
the
evil
influence
of
agitators,\"
and
have
only
one
fixed
idea,
to
emigrate
to
America.
This
is
the
land
of
Cockaigne,
into
which
the
great
Malthusian
panacea,depopulation,
has
transformed
green
Erin.
What
a
happy
life
the
Irish
factory
operative
leads
one
example
will
show:
\"On
my
recent
visit
to
the
North
of
Ireland,\"says
the
English
Factory
Inspector,
Robert
Baker,\"I
met
with
the
following
evidence
of
effort
in
an
Irish
skilled
workman
to
afford
education
to
his
children;
and
I
give
his
evidence
verbatim,
as
I
took
it
from
his
mouth.
That
he
was
a
skilled
factory
hand,
may
be
understood
when
I
say
that
he
was
employed
on
goods
for
the
Manchester
market.
'Johnson.
–
I
am
a
beetler
and
work
from
6
in
the
morning
till
11
at
night,
from
Monday
to
Friday.
Saturday
we
leave
off
at
6
p.
m.,
and
get
three
hours
of
it
(for
meals
and
rest).
I
have
five
children
in
all.
For
this
work
I
get
10s.
6d.
a
week;my
wife
works
here
also,
and
gets
5s.
a
week.
The
oldest
girl
who
is
12,
minds
the
house.
She
is
also
cook,
and
all
the
servant
we
have.
She
gets
the
young
ones
ready
for
school.
A
girl
going
past
the
house
wakes
me
at
half
past
five
in
the
morning.My
wife
gets
up
and
goes
along
with
me.
We
get
nothing
(to
eat)
before
we
come
to
work.
The
child
of
12
takes
care
of
the
little
children
all
the
day,and
we
get
nothing
till
breakfast
at
eight.
At
eight
we
go
home.
We
get
tea
once
a
week;
at
other
times
we
get
stirabout,
sometimes
of
oat-meal,sometimes
of
Indian
meal,
as
we
are
able
to
get
it.In
the
winter
we
get
a
little
sugar
and
water
to
our
Indian
meal.
In
the
summer
we
get
a
few
potatoes,planting
a
small
patch
ourselves;
and
when
they
are
done
we
get
back
to
stirabout.
Sometimes
we
get
a
little
milk
as
it
may
be.
So
we
go
on
from
day
to
day,
Sunday
and
week
day,
always
the
same
the
year
round.
I
am
always
very
much
tired
when
I
have
done
at
night.
We
may
see
a
bit
of
flesh
meat
sometimes,
but
very
seldom.
Three
of
our
children
attend
school,
for
whom
we
pay
1d.
a
week
a
head.
Our
rent
is
9d.
a
week.
Peat
for
firing
costs
1s.
6d.
a
fortnight
at
the
very
lowest.'\"
139
Such
are
Irish
wages,
such
is
Irish
life!
In
fact
the
misery
of
Ireland
is
again
the
topic
of
the
day
in
England.
At
the
end
of
1866
and
the
beginning
of
1867,
one
of
the
Irish
land
magnates,
Lord
Dufferin,set
about
its
solution
in
The
Times.
\"Wie
menschlich
von
solch
grossem
Herrn!
\"
From
Table
E.
we
saw
that,
during
1864,
of￡4,368,610
of
total
profits,
three
surplus-value
makers
pocketed
only
￡262,819;
that
in
1865,
however,
out
of
￡4,669,979
total
profits,
the
same
three
virtuosi
of\"abstinence\"
pocketed
￡274,528;
in
1864,
26
surplus
value
makers
reached
to
￡646,377;
in
1865,
28
surplus-value
makers
reached
to
￡736,448;
in
1864,121
surplus-value
makers,
￡1,076,912;
in
1865,
150
surplus-value
makers,
￡1,320,906;
in
1864,
1,131
surplus-value
makers
￡2,150,818,
nearly
half
of
the
total
annual
profit;
in
1865,
1,194
surplus-value
makers,
￡2,418,833,
more
than
half
of
the
total
annual
profit.
But
the
lion's
share,
which
an
inconceivably
small
number
of
land
magnates
in
England,
Scotland
and
Ireland
swallow
up
of
the
yearly
national
rental,is
so
monstrous
that
the
wisdom
of
the
English
State
does
not
think
fit
to
afford
the
same
statistical
materials
about
the
distribution
of
rents
as
about
the
distribution
of
profits.
Lord
Dufferin
is
one
of
those
land
magnates.
That
rent-rolls
and
profits
can
ever
be
\"excessive,\"
or
that
their
plethora
is
in
any
way
connected
with
plethora
of
the
people's
misery
is,
of
course,
an
idea
as
\"disreputable\"
as
\"unsound.\"
He
keeps
to
facts.
The
fact
is
that,
as
the
Irish
population
diminishes,
the
Irish
rent-rolls
swell;
that
depopulation
benefits
the
landlords,
therefore
also
benefits
the
soil,and,
therefore,
the
people,
that
mere
accessory
of
the
soil.
He
declares,
therefore,
that
Ireland
is
still
over
populated,
and
the
stream
of
emigration
still
flows
too
lazily.
To
be
perfectly
happy,
Ireland
must
get
rid
of
at
least
one-third
of
a
million
of
labouring
men.
Let
no
man
imagine
that
this
lord,
poetic
into
the
bargain,
is
a
physician
of
the
school
of
Sangrado,
who
as
often
as
he
did
not
find
his
patient
better,
ordered
phlebotomy
and
again
phlebotomy,
until
the
patient
lost
his
sickness
at
the
same
time
as
his
blood.
Lord
Dufferin
demands
a
new
blood-letting
of
one-third
of
a
million
only,
instead
of
about
two
millions;
in
fact,
without
the
getting
rid
of
these,
the
millennium
in
Erin
is
not
to
be.
The
proof
is
easily
given.
140
Centralisation
has
from
1851
to
1861
destroyed
principally
farms
of
the
first
three
categories,
under
1
and
not
over
15
acres.
These
above
all
must
disappear.This
gives
307,058
\"supernumerary\"
farmers,
and
reckoning
the
families
the
low
average
of
4
persons,1,228,232
persons.
On
the
extravagant
supposition
that,
after
the
agricultural
revolution
is
complete
one
fourth
of
these
are
again
absorbable,
there
remain
for
emigration
921,174
persons.
Categories
4,
5,
6,
of
over
15
and
not
over
100
acres,
are,
as
was
known
long
since
in
England,
too
small
for
capitalistic
cultivation
of
corn,
and
for
sheep-breeding
are
almost
vanishing
quantities.
On
the
same
supposition
as
before,
therefore,
there
are
further
788,761
persons
to
emigrate;
total,
1,709,532.
And
as
l'appétit
vient
en
mangeant,
Rentroll's
eyes
will
soon
discover
that
Ireland,
with
3
millions,
is
still
always
miserable,and
miserable
because
she
is
overpopulated.
Therefore
her
depopulation
must
go
yet
further,
that
thus
she
may
fulfil
her
true
destiny,
that
of
an
English
sheep
walk
and
cattle-pasture.\"
141
Like
all
good
things
in
this
bad
world,
this
profitable
method
has
its
drawbacks.
With
the
accumulation
of
rents
in
Ireland,
the
accumulation
of
the
Irish
in
America
keeps
pace.
The
Irishman,
banished
by
sheep
and
ox,
re-appears
on
the
other
side
of
the
ocean
as
a
Fenian,
and
face
to
face
with
the
old
queen
of
the
seas
rises,
threatening
and
more
threatening,
the
young
giant
Republic:
Acerba
fata
Romanos
agunt
Scelusque
fraternae
necis.
[A
cruel
fate
torments
the
Romans,
and
the
crime
of
fratricide]
NOTES:
1Karl
Marx,
l.
c.,
\"A
égalité
d'oppression
des
masses,plus
un
pays
a
de
prolétaires
et
plus
il
est
riche.\"
(Colins,\"L'Economie
Politique.
Source
des
Révolutions
et
des
Utopies,
prétendues
Socialistes.\"
Paris,
1857,
t.
III.,
p.
331.)
Our
\"prolétarian\"
is
economically
none
other
than
the
wage
labourer,
who
produces
and
increases
capital,
and
is
thrown
out
on
the
streets,
as
soon
as
he
is
superfluous
for
the
needs
of
aggrandisement
of
\"Monsieur
capital,\"
as
Pecqueur
calls
this
person.
\"The
sickly
proletarian
of
the
primitive
forest,\"
is
a
pretty
Roscherian
fancy.
The
primitive
forester
is
owner
of
the
primitive
forest,
and
uses
the
primitive
forest
as
his
property
with
the
freedom
of
an
orang-outang.
He
is
not,
therefore,
a
proletarian.
This
would
only
be
the
case,
if
the
primitive
forest
exploited
him,
instead
of
being
exploited
by
him.
As
far
as
his
health
is
concerned,
such
a
man
would
well
bear
comparison,not
only
with
the
modern
proletarian,
but
also
with
the
syphilitic
and
scrofulous
upper
classes.
But,
no
doubt,
Herr
Wilhelm
Roscher,
by
\"primitive
forest\"
means
his
native
heath
of
Lüneburg.
2John
Bellers,
l.
c.,
p.
2.
3Bernard
de
Mandeville:
\"The
Fable
of
the
Bees,\"
5th
edition,
London,
1728.
Remarks,
pp.
212,
213,
328.
\"Temperate
living
and
constant
employment
is
the
direct
road,
for
the
poor,to
rational
happiness\"
[by
which
he
most
probably
means
long
working
days
and
little
means
of
subsistence],
\"and
to
riches
and
strength
for
the
state\"
(viz.,
for
the
landlords,
capitalists,and
their
political
dignitaries
and
agents).
(\"An
Essay
on
Trade
and
Commerce,\"
London,
1770,
p.
54.)
4Eden
should
have
asked,
whose
creatures
then
are
\"the
civil
institutions\"
From
his
standpoint
of
juridical
illusion,
he
does
not
regard
the
law
as
a
product
of
the
material
relations
of
production,
but
conversely
the
relations
of
production
as
products
of
the
law.
Linguet
overthrew
Montesquieu's
illusory\"Esprit
des
lois\"
with
one
word:
\"
L'esprit
des
lois,
c'est
la
propriété.\"
[The
spirit
of
laws
is
property]
5Eden,
l.
c.,
Vol.
1,
book
I.,
chapter
1,
pp.
1,
2,
and
preface,p.
xx.
6If
the
reader
reminds
me
of
Malthus,
whose
\"Essay
on
Population\"
appeared
in
1798,
I
remind
him
that
this
work
in
its
first
form
is
nothing
more
than
a
schoolboyish,
superficial
plagiary
of
De
Foe,
Sir
James
Steuart,
Townsend,
Franklin,Wallace,
&c.,
and
does
not
contain
a
single
sentence
thought
out
by
himself.
The
great
sensation
this
pamphlet
caused,
was
due
solely
to
party
interest.
The
French
Revolution
had
found
passionate
defenders
in
the
United
Kingdom;
the
\"principle
of
population,\"
slowly
worked
out
in
the
eighteenth
century,and
then,
in
the
midst
of
a
great
social
crisis,
proclaimed
with
drums
and
trumpets
as
the
infallible
antidote
to
the
teachings
of
Condorcet,
&c.,
was
greeted
with
jubilance
by
the
English
oligarchy
as
the
great
destroyer
of
all
hankerings
after
human
development.
Malthus,
hugely
astonished
at
his
success,gave
himself
to
stuffing
into
his
book
materials
superficially
compiled,
and
adding
to
it
new
matter,
not
discovered
but
annexed
by
him.
Note
further:
Although
Malthus
was
a
parson
of
the
English
State
Church,
he
had
taken
the
monastic
vow
of
celibacy
—
one
of
the
conditions
of
holding
a
Fellowship
in
Protestant
Cambridge
University:
\"Socios
collegiorum
maritos
esse
non
permittimus,
sed
statim
postquam
quis
uxorem
duxerit
socius
collegii
desinat
esse.\"
(\"Reports
of
Cambridge
University
Commission,\"
p.
172.)
This
circumstance
favourably
distinguishes
Malthus
from
the
other
Protestant
parsons,
who
have
shuffled
off
the
command
enjoining
celibacy
of
the
priesthood
and
have
taken,
\"Be
fruitful
and
multiply,\"as
their
special
Biblical
mission
in
such
a
degree
that
they
generally
contribute
to
the
increase
of
population
to
a
really
unbecoming
extent,
whilst
they
preach
at
the
same
time
to
the
labourers
the
\"principle
of
population.\"
It
is
characteristic
that
the
economic
fall
of
man,
the
Adam's
apple,
the
urgent
appetite,\"the
checks
which
tend
to
blunt
the
shafts
of
Cupid,\"
as
Parson
Townsend
waggishly
puts
it,
that
this
delicate
question
was
and
is
monopolised
by
the
Reverends
of
Protestant
Theology,or
rather
of
the
Protestant
Church.
With
the
exception
of
the
Venetian
monk,
Ortes,
an
original
and
clever
writer,
most
of
the
population
theory
teachers
are
Protestant
parsons.
For
instance,
Bruckner,
\"Théorie
du
Système
animal,\"
Leyde,1767,
in
which
the
whole
subject
of
the
modern
population
theory
is
exhausted,
and
to
which
the
passing
quarrel
between
Quesnay
and
his
pupil,
the
elder
Mirabeau,
furnished
ideas
on
the
same
topic;
then
Parson
Wallace,
Parson
Townsend,
Parson
Malthus
and
his
pupil,
the
arch-Parson
Thomas
Chalmers,
to
say
nothing
of
lesser
reverend
scribblers
in
this
line.
Originally,Political
Economy
was
studied
by
philosophers
like
Hobbes,Locke,
Hume;
by
businessmen
and
statesmen,
like
Thomas
More,
Temple,
Sully,
De
Witt,
North,
Law,
Vanderlint,Cantillon,
Franklin;
and
especially,
and
with
the
greatest
success,
by
medical
men
like
Petty,
Barbon,
Mandeville,Quesnay.
Even
in
the
middle
of
the
eighteenth
century,
the
Rev.
Mr.
Tucker,
a
notable
economist
of
his
time,
excused
himself
for
meddling
with
the
things
of
Mammon.
Later
on,and
in
truth
with
this
very
\"Principle
of
population,\"
struck
the
hour
of
the
Protestant
parsons.
Petty,
who
regarded
the
population
as
the
basis
of
wealth,
and
was,
like
Adam
Smith,an
outspoken
foe
to
parsons,
says,
as
if
he
had
a
presentiment
of
their
bungling
interference,
\"that
Religion
best
flourishes
when
the
Priests
are
most
mortified,
as
was
before
said
of
the
Law,
which
best
flourisheth
when
lawyers
have
least
to
do.\"He
advises
the
Protestant
priests,
therefore,
if
they,
once
for
all,
will
not
follow
the
Apostle
Paul
and
\"mortify\"
themselves
by
celibacy,
\"not
to
breed
more
Churchmen
than
the
Benefices,as
they
now
stand
shared
out,
will
receive,
that
is
to
say,
if
there
be
places
for
about
twelve
thousand
in
England
and
Wales,
it
will
not
be
safe
to
breed
up
24,000
ministers,
for
then
the
twelve
thousand
which
are
unprovided
for,
will
seek
ways
how
to
get
themselves
a
livelihood,
which
they
cannot
do
more
easily
than
by
persuading
the
people
that
the
twelve
thousand
incumbents
do
poison
or
starve
their
souls,
and
misguide
them
in
their
way
to
Heaven.\"
(Petty:
\"A
Treatise
of
Taxes
and
Contributions,\"
London,
1667,
p.
57.)
Adam
Smith's
position
with
the
Protestant
priesthood
of
his
time
is
shown
by
the
following.
In
\"A
Letter
to
A.
Smith,
L.L.D.
On
the
Life,Death,
and
Philosophy
of
his
Friend,
David
Hume.
By
one
of
the
People
called
Christians,\"
4th
Edition,
Oxford,
1784,
Dr.Horne,
Bishop
of
Norwich,
reproves
Adam
Smith,
because
in
a
published
letter
to
Mr.
Strahan,
he
\"embalmed
his
friend
David\"
(sc.
Hume);
because
he
told
the
world
how
\"Hume
amused
himself
on
his
deathbed
with
Lucian
and
Whist,\"
and
because
he
even
had
the
impudence
to
write
of
Hume:
\"I
have
always
considered
him,
both
in
his
life-time
and
since
his
death,
as
approaching
as
nearly
to
the
idea
of
a
perfectly
wise
and
virtuous
man,
as,
perhaps,
the
nature
of
human
frailty
will
permit.\"
The
bishop
cries
out,
in
a
passion:
\"Is
it
right
in
you,Sir,
to
hold
up
to
our
view
as
'perfectly
wise
and
virtuous,'the
character
and
conduct
of
one,
who
seems
to
have
been
possessed
with
an
incurable
antipathy
to
all
that
is
called
Religion;
and
who
strained
every
nerve
to
explode,
suppress
and
extirpate
the
spirit
of
it
among
men,
that
its
very
name,if
he
could
effect
it,
might
no
more
be
had
in
remembrance\"(l.
c.,
p.
8.)
\"But
let
not
the
lovers
of
truth
be
discouraged.Atheism
cannot
be
of
long
continuance.\"
(P.
17.)
Adam
Smith,\"had
the
atrocious
wickedness
to
propagate
atheism
through
the
land
(viz.,
by
his
\"Theory
of
Moral
Sentiments\").
Upon
the
whole,
Doctor,
your
meaning
is
good;
but
I
think
you
will
not
succeed
this
time.
You
would
persuade
us,
by
the
example
of
David
Hume,
Esq.,
that
atheism
is
the
only
cordial
for
low
spirits,
and
the
proper
antidote
against
the
fear
of
death....
You
may
smile
over
Babylon
in
ruins
and
congratulate
the
hardened
Pharaoh
on
his
overthrow
in
the
Red
Sea.\"
(l.
c.,
pp.
21,
22.)
One
orthodox
individual,
amongst
Adam
Smith's
college
friends,
writes
after
his
death:
\"Smith's
well-placed
affection
for
Hume
...
hindered
him
from
being
a
Christian....
When
he
met
with
honest
men
whom
he
liked
...
he
would
believe
almost
anything
they
said.
Had
he
been
a
friend
of
the
worthy
ingenious
Horrox
he
would
have
believed
that
the
moon
some
times
disappeared
in
a
clear
sky
without
the
interposition
of
a
cloud....
He
approached
to
republicanism
in
his
political
principles.\"
(\"The
Bee.\"
By
James
Anderson,
18
Vols.,
Vol.
3,pp.
166,
165,
Edinburgh,
1791-93.)
Parson
Thomas
Chalmers
has
his
suspicions
as
to
Adam
Smith
having
invented
the
category
of
\"unproductive
labourers,\"
solely
for
the
Protestant
parsons,
in
spite
of
their
blessed
work
in
the
vineyard
of
the
Lord.
7\"The
limit,
however,
to
the
employment
of
both
the
operative
and
the
labourer
is
the
same;
namely,
the
possibility
of
the
employer
realising
a
profit
on
the
produce
of
their
industry.
If
the
rate
of
wages
is
such
as
to
reduce
the
master's
gains
below
the
average
profit
of
capital,
he
will
cease
to
employ
them,
or
he
will
only
employ
them
on
condition
of
submission
to
a
reduction
of
wages.\"
(John
Wade,
l.
c.,
p.
241.)
8Note
by
the
Institute
of
Marxism-Leninism
to
the
Russian
edition:
The
MS
in
the
first
case
says
\"little\"
and
in
the
second
case
\"much\";
the
correction
has
been
introduced
according
to
the
authorised
French
translation.
9Cf.
Karl
Marx:
\"Zur
Kritik
der
Politischen
Oekonomie,\"pp.
166,
seq.
10\"If
we
now
return
to
our
first
inquiry,
wherein
it
was
shown
that
capital
itself
is
only
the
result
of
human
labour...it
seems
quite
incomprehensible
that
man
can
have
fallen
under
the
domination
of
capital,
his
own
product;
can
be
subordinated
to
it;
and
as
in
reality
this
is
beyond
dispute
the
case,
involuntarily
the
question
arises:
How
has
the
labourer
been
able
to
pass
from
being
master
of
capital
—
as
its
creator—
to
being
its
slave\"
(Von
Thünen,
\"Der
isolierte
Staat\"
Part
ii.,
Section
ii.,
Rostock,
1863,
pp.
5,
6.)
It
is
Thünen's
merit
to
have
asked
this
question.
His
answer
is
simply
childish.
11Adam
Smith,
\"Enquiry
into
the
Nature
of
...\",
Volume
I.
12
Note
in
the
4th
German
edition.
—
The
latest
Englishand
American
\"trusts\"
are
already
striving
to
attain
this
goal
by
attempting
to
unite
at
least
all
the
large-scale
concerns
in
one
branch
of
industry
into
one
great
joint-stock
company
with
a
practical
monopoly.
F.
E.
13
Note
in
the
3rd
German
edition.
—
In
Marx's
copy
thereis
here
the
marginal
note:
\"Here
note
for
working
out
later;if
the
extension
is
only
quantitative,
then
for
a
greater
and
a
smaller
capital
in
the
same
branch
of
business
the
profits
are
as
the
magnitudes
of
the
capitals
advanced.
If
the
quantitative
extension
induces
qualitative
change,
then
the
rate
of
profit
on
the
larger
capital
rises
simultaneously.\"
F.
E.
14The
census
of
England
and
Wales
shows:
all
persons
employed
in
agriculture
(landlords,
farmers,
gardeners,shepherds,
&c.,
included):
1851,
2,011,447;
1861,
1,924,110.Fall,
87,337.
Worsted
manufacture:
1851,
102,714
persons;1861,
79,242.
Silk
weaving:
1851,
111,940;
1861,
101,678.Calico-printing:
1851,
12,098;
1861,
12,556.
A
small
rise
that,
in
the
face
of
the
enormous
extension
of
this
industry
and
implying
a
great
fall
proportionally
in
the
number
of
labourers
employed.
Hat-making:
1851,
15,957;
1861,
13,814.Straw-hat
and
bonnet-making:
1851,
20,393;
1861,
18,176.Malting:
1851,
10,566;
1861,
10,677.
Chandlery,
1851,
4,949;1861,
4,686.
This
fall
is
due,
besides
other
causes,
to
the
increase
in
lighting
by
gas.
Comb-making:
1851,
2,038;
1861,1,478.
Sawyers:
1851,
30,552;
1861,
31,647
—
a
small
rise
in
consequence
of
the
increase
of
sawing-machines.
Nail
making:
1851,
26,940;
1861,
26,130
—
fall
in
consequence
of
the
competition
of
machinery.
Tin
and
copper-mining:
1851,31,360;
1861,
32,041.
On
the
other
hand:
Cotton-spinning
and
weaving:
1851,
371,777;
1861,
456,646.
Coal-mining:1851,
183,389,
1861,
246,613,
\"The
increase
of
labourers
is
generally
greatest,
since
1851,
in
such
branches
of
industry
in
which
machinery
has
not
up
to
the
present
been
employed
with
success.\"
(Census
of
England
and
Wales
for
1861.
Vol.
III.London,
1863,
p.
36.)
15
Added
in
the
4th
German
edition.
—
The
law
ofprogressive
diminution
of
the
relative
magnitude
of
variable
capital
and
its
effect
on
the
condition
of
the
class
of
wage
workers
is
conjectured
rather
than
understood
by
some
of
the
prominent
economists
of
the
classical
school.
The
greatest
service
was
rendered
here
by
John
Barton,
although
he,
like
all
the
rest,
lumps
together
constant
and
fixed
capital,
variable
and
circulating
capital.
He
says:
\"The
demand
for
labour
depends
on
the
increase
of
circulating,
and
not
of
fixed
capital.
Were
it
true
that
the
proportion
between
these
two
sorts
of
capital
is
the
same
at
all
times,
and
in
all
circumstances,
then,
indeed,
it
follows
that
the
number
of
labourers
employed
is
in
proportion
to
the
wealth
of
the
state.
But
such
a
proposition
has
not
the
semblance
of
probability.
As
arts
are
cultivated,
and
civilisation
is
extended,fixed
capital
bears
a
larger
and
larger
proportion
to
circulating
capital.
The
amount
of
fixed
capital
employed
in
the
production
of
a
piece
of
British
muslin
is
at
least
a
hundred,
probably
a
thousand
times
greater
than
that
employed
in
a
similar
piece
of
Indian
muslin.
And
the
proportion
of
circulating
capital
is
a
hundred
or
thousand
times
less
...
the
whole
of
the
annual
savings,
added
to
the
fixed
capital,
would
have
no
effect
in
increasing
the
demand
for
labour.\"
(John
Barton,
\"Observations
on
the
Circumstances
which
Influence
the
Condition
of
the
Labouring
Classes
of
Society.\"
London,
1817,
pp.
16,
17.)\"The
same
cause
which
may
increase
the
net
revenue
of
the
country
may
at
the
same
time
render
the
population
redundant,and
deteriorate
the
condition
of
the
labourer.\"
(Ricardo,
l.
c.,p.
469.)
With
increase
of
capital,
\"the
demand
[for
labour]
will
be
in
a
diminishing
ratio.\"
(Ibid.,
p.
480,
Note.)
\"The
amount
of
capital
devoted
to
the
maintenance
of
labour
may
vary,independently
of
any
changes
in
the
whole
amount
of
capital....Great
fluctuations
in
the
amount
of
employment,
and
great
suffering
may
become
more
frequent
as
capital
itself
becomes
more
plentiful.\"
(Richard
Jones,
\"An
Introductory
Lecture
on
Pol.
Econ.,\"
Lond.
1833,
p.
13)
\"Demand
[for
labour]
will
rise...
not
in
proportion
to
the
accumulation
of
the
general
capital....
Every
augmentation,
therefore,
in
the
national
stock
destined
for
reproduction,
comes,
in
the
progress
of
society,
to
have
less
and
less
influence
upon
the
condition
of
the
labourer.\"(Ramsay,
l.
c.,
pp.
90,
91.)
精選分類
