Chapter II (1)

INFLUENCE EXERCISED BY PHYSICAL LAWS OVER THE ORGANIZATION OF
SOCIETY AND OVER THE CHARACTER OF INDIVIDUALS.

If we inquire what those physical agents are by which the human race is most powerfully influenced, we shall find that they may be classed under four heads: namely, Climate, Food, Soil, and the General Aspect of Nature; by which last, I mean those appearances which, though presented chiefly to the sight, have, through the medium of that or other senses, directed the association of ideas, and hence in different countries have given rise to different habits of national thought. To one of these four classes, may be referred all the external phenomena by which Man has been permanently affected. The last of these classes, or what I call the General Aspect of Nature, produces its principal results by exciting the imagination, and by suggesting those innumerable superstitions which are the great obstacles to advancing knowledge. And as, in the infancy of a people, the power of such superstitions is supreme, it has happened that the various Aspects of Nature have caused corresponding varieties in the popular character, and have imparted to the national religion peculiarities which, under certain circumstances, it is impossible to efface. The other three agents, namely, Climate, Food, and Soil, have, so far as we are aware, had no direct influence of this sort; but they have, as I am about to prove, originated the most important consequences in regard to the general organization of society, and from them there have followed many of those large and conspicuous differences between nations, which are often ascribed to some fundamental difference in the various races into which mankind is divided. But while such original distinctions of race are altogether hypothetical,[38] the discrepancies which are caused by difference of climate, food, and soil, are capable of a satisfactory explanation, and, when understood, will be found to clear up many of the difficulties which still obscure the study of history. I purpose, therefore, in the first place, to examine the laws of these three vast agents in so far as they are connected with Man in his social condition; and having traced the working of those laws with as much precision as the present state of physical knowledge will allow, I shall then examine the remaining agent, namely, the General Aspect of Nature, and shall endeavour to point out the most important divergencies to which its variations have, in different countries, naturally given rise.

[38] I cordially subscribe to the remark of one of the greatest thinkers
of our time, who says of the supposed differences of race, 'of all
vulgar modes of escaping from the consideration of the effect of
social and moral influences on the human mind, the most vulgar is
that of attributing the diversities of conduct and character to
inherent natural differences.' _Mill's Principles of Political
Economy_, vol. i. p. 390. Ordinary writers are constantly falling
into the error of assuming the existence of this difference, which
may or may not exist but which most assuredly has never been
proved. Some singular instances of this will be found in _Alison's
History of Europe_, vol. ii. p. 336, vol. vi. p. 136, vol. viii.
pp. 525, 526, vol. xiii. p. 347; where the historian thinks that
by a few strokes of his pen he can settle a question of the
greatest difficulty, connected with some of the most intricate
problems in physiology. On the supposed relation between race and
temperament, see _Comte_, _Philosophie Positive_, vol. iii. p. 355.

Beginning, then, with climate, food, and soil, it is evident that these three physical powers are in no small degree dependent on each other: that is to say, there is a very close connexion between the climate of a country and the food which will ordinarily be grown in that country; while at the same time the food is itself influenced by the soil which produces it, as also by the elevation or depression of the land, by the state of the atmosphere, and, in a word, by all those conditions to the assemblage of which the name of Physical Geography is, in its largest sense, commonly given.[39]

[39] As to the proper limits of physical geography, see _Prichard on
Ethnology_, in _Report of the British Association for_ 1847,
p. 235. The word 'climate' I always use in the narrow and popular
sense. Dr. Forry and many previous writers make it nearly coincide
with 'physical geography:' 'Climate constitutes the aggregate of
all the external physical circumstances appertaining to each
locality in its relation to organic nature.' _Forry's Climate of
the United States and its Endemic Influences_, New York, 1842,
p. 127.

The union between these physical agents being thus intimate, it seems advisable to consider them not under their own separate heads, but rather under the separate heads of the effects produced by their united action. In this way we shall rise at once to a more comprehensive view of the whole question; we shall avoid the confusion that would be caused by artificially separating phenomena which are in themselves inseparable; and we shall be able to see more clearly the extent of that remarkable influence, which, in an early stage of society, the powers of Nature exercise over the fortunes of Man.

Of all the results which are produced among a people by their climate, food, and soil, the accumulation of wealth is the earliest, and in many respects the most important. For although the progress of knowledge eventually accelerates the increase of wealth, it is nevertheless certain that, in the first formation of society, the wealth must accumulate before the knowledge can begin. As long as every man is engaged in collecting the materials necessary for his own subsistence, there will be neither leisure nor taste for higher pursuits; no science can possibly be created, and the utmost that can be effected will be an attempt to economise labour by the contrivance of such rude and imperfect instruments as even the most barbarous people are able to invent.

In a state of society like this, the accumulation of wealth is the first great step that can be taken, because without wealth there can be no leisure, and without leisure there can be no knowledge. If what a people consume is always exactly equal to what they possess, there will be no residue, and therefore, no capital being accumulated, there will be no means by which the unemployed classes may be maintained.[40] But if the produce is greater than the consumption, an overplus arises, which, according to well-known principles, increases itself, and eventually becomes a fund out of which, immediately or remotely, every one is supported who does not create the wealth upon which he lives. And now it is that the existence of an intellectual class first becomes possible, because for the first time there exists a previous accumulation, by means of which men can use what they did not produce, and are thus enabled to devote themselves to subjects for which at an earlier period the pressure of their daily wants would have left them no time.

[40] By unemployed classes, I mean what Adam Smith calls the
unproductive classes; and though both expressions are strictly
speaking inaccurate, the word 'unemployed' seems to convey more
clearly than any other the idea in the text.

Thus it is that of all the great social improvements the accumulation of wealth must be the first, because without it there can be neither taste nor leisure for that acquisition of knowledge on which, as I shall hereafter prove, the progress of civilization depends. Now, it is evident that among an entirely ignorant people, the rapidity with which wealth is created will be solely regulated by the physical peculiarities of their country. At a later period, and when the wealth has been capitalized, other causes come into play; but until this occurs, the progress can only depend on two circumstances: first on the energy and regularity with which labour is conducted, and secondly on the returns made to that labour by the bounty of nature. And these two causes are themselves the result of physical antecedents. The returns made to labour are governed by the fertility of the soil, which is itself regulated partly by the admixture of its chemical components, partly by the extent to which, from rivers or from other natural causes, the soil is irrigated, and partly by the heat and humidity of the atmosphere. On the other hand, the energy and regularity with which labour is conducted, will be entirely dependent on the influence of climate. This will display itself in two different ways. The first, which is a very obvious consideration, is, that if the heat is intense, men will be indisposed, and in some degree unfitted, for that active industry which in a milder climate they might willingly have exerted. The other consideration, which has been less noticed, but is equally important, is, that climate influences labour not only by enervating the labourer or by invigorating him, but also by the effect it produces on the regularity of his habits.[41] Thus we find that no people living in a very northern latitude have ever possessed that steady and unflinching industry for which the inhabitants of temperate regions are remarkable. The reason of this becomes clear, when we remember that in the more northern countries the severity of the weather, and, at some seasons, the deficiency of light, render it impossible for the people to continue their usual out-of-door employments. The result is, that the working classes being compelled to cease from their ordinary pursuits, are rendered more prone to desultory habits; the chain of their industry is as it were broken, and they lose that impetus which long-continued and uninterrupted practice never fails to give. Hence there arises a national character more fitful and capricious than that possessed by a people whose climate permits the regular exercise of their ordinary industry. Indeed, so powerful is this principle, that we may perceive its operation even under the most opposite circumstances. It would be difficult to conceive a greater difference in government, laws, religion, and manners, than that which distinguishes Sweden and Norway on the one hand, from Spain and Portugal on the other. But these four countries have one great point in common. In all of them, continued agricultural industry is impracticable. In the two southern countries, labour is interrupted by the heat, by the dryness of the weather, and by the consequent state of the soil. In the two northern countries, the same effect is produced by the severity of the winter and the shortness of the days. The consequence is, that these four nations, though so different in other respects, are all remarkable for a certain instability and fickleness of character; presenting a striking contrast to the more regular and settled habits which are established in countries whose climate subjects the working classes to fewer interruptions, and imposes on them the necessity of a more constant and unremitting employment.[42]

[41] This has been entirely neglected by the three most philosophical
writers on climate: Montesquieu, Hume, and M. Charles Comte in his
_Traité de Législation_. It is also omitted in the remarks of
M. Guizot on the influence of climate, _Civilisation en Europe_,
p. 97.

[42] See the admirable remarks in _Laing's Denmark_, 1852, pp. 204, 366,
367; though Norway appears to be a better illustration than
Denmark. In _Rey's Science Sociale_, vol. i. pp. 195, 196, there
are some calculations respecting the average loss to agricultural
industry caused by changes in the weather; but no notice is taken
of the connexion between these changes, when abrupt, and the tone
of the national character.

These are the great physical causes by which the creation of wealth is governed. There are, no doubt, other circumstances which operate with considerable force, and which, in a more advanced state of society, possess an equal, and sometimes a superior, influence. But this is at a later period; and looking at the history of wealth in its earliest stage, it will be found to depend entirely on soil and climate: the soil regulating the returns made to any given amount of labour; the climate regulating the energy and constancy of the labour itself. It requires but a hasty glance at past events, to prove the immense power of these two great physical conditions. For there is no instance in history of any country being civilized by its own efforts, unless it has possessed one of these conditions in a very favourable form. In Asia, civilization has always been confined to that vast tract where a rich and alluvial soil has secured to man that wealth without some share of which no intellectual progress can begin. This great region extends, with a few interruptions, from the east of Southern China to the western coasts of Asia Minor, of Ph[oe]nicia, and of Palestine. To the north of this immense belt, there is a long line of barren country which has invariably been peopled by rude and wandering tribes, who are kept in poverty by the ungenial nature of the soil, and who, as long as they remained on it, have never emerged from their uncivilized state. How entirely this depends on physical causes, is evident from the fact that these same Mongolian and Tartarian hordes have, at different periods, founded great monarchies in China, in India, and in Persia, and have, on all such occasions, attained a civilization nowise inferior to that possessed by the most nourishing of the ancient kingdoms. For in the fertile plains of Southern Asia,[43] nature has supplied all the materials of wealth; and there it was that these barbarous tribes acquired for the first time some degree of refinement, produced a national literature, and organized a national polity; none of which things they, in their native land, had been able to effect.[44] In the same way, the Arabs in their own country have, owing to the extreme aridity of their soil,[45] always been a rude and uncultivated people; for in their case, as in all others, great ignorance is the fruit of great poverty. But in the seventh century they conquered Persia;[46] in the eighth century they conquered the best part of Spain;[47] in the ninth century they conquered the Punjaub, and eventually nearly the whole of India.[48] Scarcely were they established in their fresh settlements, when their character seemed to undergo a great change. They, who in their original land were little else than roving savages, were now for the first time able to accumulate wealth, and, therefore, for the first time did they make some progress in the arts of civilization. In Arabia they had been a mere race of wandering shepherds;[49] in their new abodes they became the founders of mighty empires--they built cities, endowed schools, collected libraries; and the traces of their power are still to be seen at Cordova, at Bagdad, and at Delhi.[50] Precisely in the same manner, there is adjoining Arabia at the north, and only separated from it elsewhere by the narrow waters of the Red Sea, an immense sandy plain, which, covering the whole of Africa in the same latitude, extends westward until it reaches the shores of the Atlantic.[51] This enormous tract is, like Arabia, a barren waste;[52] and therefore, as in Arabia, the inhabitants have always been entirely uncivilized, acquiring no knowledge, simply because they have accumulated no wealth.[53] But this great desert is, in its eastern part, irrigated by the waters of the Nile, the overflowing of which covers the sand with a rich alluvial deposit, that yields to labour the most abundant, and indeed the most extraordinary, returns.[54] The consequence is, that in that spot, wealth was rapidly accumulated, the cultivation of knowledge quickly followed, and this narrow strip of land[55] became the seat of Egyptian civilization; a civilization which, though grossly exaggerated,[56] forms a striking contrast to the barbarism of the other nations of Africa, none of which have been able to work out their own progress, or emerge, in any degree, from the ignorance to which the penury of nature has doomed them.

[43] This expression has been used by different geographers in different
senses; but I take it in its common acceptation, without reference
to the more strictly physical view of Ritter and his followers in
regard to Central Asia. See _Prichard's Physical History of
Mankind_, vol. iv. p. 278, edit. 1844. At p. 92, Prichard makes the
Himalaya the southern boundary of Central Asia.

[44] There is reason to believe that the Tartars of Thibet received even
their alphabet from India. See the interesting Essay on Tartarian
Coins in _Journal of Asiatic Society_, vol. iv. pp. 276, 277; and
on the Scythian Alphabet, see vol. xii. p. 336.

[45] In _Somerville's Physical Geography_, vol. i. p. 132, it is said
that in Arabia there are 'no rivers;' but Mr. Wellsted (_Travels in
Arabia_, vol. ii. p. 409) mentions one which empties itself into
the sea five miles west of Aden. On the streams in Arabia, see
_Meiners über die Fruchtbarkeit der Länder_, vol. i. pp. 149, 150.
That the sole deficiency is want of irrigation appears from
Burckhardt, who says (_Travels in Arabia_, vol. i. p. 240), 'In
Arabia, wherever the ground can be irrigated by wells, the sands
may be soon made productive.' And for a striking description of one
of the oases of Oman, which shows what Arabia might have been with
a good river system, see _Journal of Geographical Society_, vol.
vii. pp. 106, 107.

[46] Mr. Morier (_Journal of Geog. Soc._ vol. vii. p. 230) says, 'the
conquest of Persia by the Saracens A.D. 651.' However, the fate of
Persia was decided by the battles of Kudseah and Nahavund, which
were fought in 638 and 641: see _Malcolm's History of Persia_,
vol. i. pp. xvi. 139, 142.

[47] In 712. _Hallam's Middle Ages_, vol. i. p. 369.

[48] They were established in the Punjaub early in the ninth century,
but did not conquer Guzerat and Malwa until five hundred years
later. Compare Wilson's note in the _Vishnu Purana_, pp. 481, 482,
with _Asiatic Researches_, vol. ix. pp. 187, 188, 203. On their
progress in the more southern part of the Peninsula, see _Journal
of Asiatic Society_, vol. iii. pp. 222, 223, vol. iv. pp. 28-30.

[49] 'A race of pastoral barbarians.' _Dickinson on the Arabic
Language_, in _Journal of Asiat. Society_, vol. v. p. 323. Compare
_Reynier_, _Economie des Arabes_, pp. 27, 28; where, however, a
very simple question is needlessly complicated. The old Persian
writers bestowed on them the courteous appellation of 'a band of
naked lizard-eaters.' _Malcolm's Hist. of Persia_, vol. i. p. 133.
Indeed, there are few things in history better proved than the
barbarism of a people whom some writers wish to invest with a
romantic interest. The eulogy passed on them by Meiners is rather
suspicious, for he concludes by saying, 'die Eroberungen der
Araber waren höchst selten so blutig und zerstörend, als die
Eroberungen der Tataren, Persen, Türken, u.s.w. in ältern und
neuern Zeiten waren.' _Fruchtbarkeit der Länder_, vol. i. p. 153.
If this is the best that can be said, the comparison with Tartars
and Turks does not prove much; but it is singular that this learned
author should have forgotten a passage in Diodorus Siculus which
gives a pleasant description of them nineteen centuries ago on the
eastern side: _Bibliothec. Hist._ lib. ii. vol. ii. p. 137.
[Greek: echousi de bion lêstrikon, kai pollên tês homorou chôras
katatrechontes lêsteuousin], &c.

[50] The only branch of knowledge which the Arabians ever raised to a
science was astronomy, which began to be cultivated under the
caliphs about the middle of the eighth century, and went on
improving until 'la ville de Bagdad fut, pendant le dixième siècle,
le théâtre principal de l'astronomie chez les orientaux.'
_Montucla_, _Histoire des Mathématiques_, vol. i. pp. 355, 364. The
old Pagan Arabs, like most barbarous people living in a clear
atmosphere, had such an empirical acquaintance with the celestial
phenomena as was used for practical purposes; but there is no
evidence to justify the common opinion that they studied this
subject as a science. Dr. Dorn (_Transactions of the Asiatic
Society_, vol. ii. p. 371) says, 'of a scientific knowledge of
astronomy among them no traces can be discovered.' Beausobre
(_Histoire de Manichée_, vol. i. p. 20) is quite enthusiastic about
the philosophy of the Arabs in the time of Pythagoras! and he tells
us, that 'ces peuples out toujours cultivé les sciences.' To
establish this fact, he quotes a long passage from a life of
Mohammed written early in the eighteenth century by
Boulainvilliers, whom he calls, 'un des plus beaux génies de
France.' If this is an accurate description, those who have read
the works of Boulainvilliers will think that France was badly off
for men of genius; and as to his life of Mohammed, it is little
better than a romance: the author was ignorant of Arabic, and knew
nothing which had not been already communicated by Maracci and
Pococke. See _Biographie Universelle_, vol. v. p. 321.

In regard to the later Arabian astronomers, one of their great
merits was to approximate to the value of the annual precession
much closer than Ptolemy had done. See _Grant's History of
Physical Astronomy_, 1852, p. 319.

[51] Indeed it goes beyond it: 'the trackless sands of the Sahara
desert, which is even prolonged for miles into the Atlantic Ocean
in the form of sandbanks.' _Somerville's Physical Geography_,
vol. i. p. 149. For a singular instance of one of these sandbanks
being formed into an island, see _Journal of Geograph. Society_,
vol. ii. p. 284. The Sahara desert, exclusive of Bornou and
Darfour, covers an area of 194,000 square leagues; that is, nearly
three times the size of France, or twice the size of the
Mediterranean. Compare _Lyell's Geology_, p. 694, with
_Somerville's Connexion of the Sciences_, p. 294. As to the
probable southern limits of the plateau of the Sahara, see
_Richardson's Mission to Central Africa_, 1853, vol. ii. pp. 146,
156; and as to the part of it adjoining the Mandingo country, see
_Mungo Park's Travels_, vol. i. pp. 237, 238. Respecting the
country south of Mandara, some scanty information was collected by
Denham in the neighbourhood of Lake Tchad. _Denham's Northern and
Central Africa_, pp. 121, 122, 144-146.

[52] Richardson, who travelled through it south of Tripoli, notices its
'features of sterility, of unconquerable barrenness.' _Richardson's
Sahara_, 1848, vol. i. p. 86; and see the striking picture at
p. 409. The long and dreary route from Mourzouk to Yeou, on Lake
Tchad, is described by Denham, one of the extremely few Europeans
who have performed that hazardous journey. _Denham's Central
Africa_, pp. 2-60. Even on the shore of the Tchad there is hardly
any vegetation, 'a coarse grass and a small bell-flower being the
only plants that I could discover,' p. 90. Compare his remark on
Bornou, p. 317. The condition of part of the desert in the
fourteenth century is described in the _Travels of Ibn Batuta_,
p. 233, which should be compared with the account given by Diodorus
Siculus of the journey of Alexander to the temple of Ammon.
_Bibliothec. Historic._ lib. xvii. vol. vii. p. 348.

[53] Richardson, who travelled in 1850 from Tripoli to within a few days
of Lake Tchad, was struck by the stationary character of the
people. He says, 'neither in the desert nor in the kingdoms of
Central Africa is there any march of civilization. All goes on
according to a certain routine established for ages past.'
_Mission to Central Africa_, vol. i. pp. 304, 305. See similar
remarks in _Pallme's Travels in Kordofan_, pp. 108, 109.

[54] Abd-Allatif, who was in Egypt early in the thirteenth century,
gives an interesting account of the rising of the Nile, to which
Egypt owes its fertility. _Abd-Allatif_, _Relation de l'Egypte_,
pp. 329-340, 374-376, and Appendix, p. 504. See also on these
periodical inundations. _Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians_, vol. iv.
pp. 101-104; and on the half-astronomical half theological notions
connected with them, pp. 372-377, vol. v. pp. 291, 292. Compare on
the religious importance of the Nile _Bunsen's Egypt_, vol. i.
p. 409. The expression, therefore, of Herodotus (book ii. chap.
v. vol. i. p. 484), [Greek: dôron tou potamou] is true in a much
larger sense than he intended; since to the Nile Egypt owes all
the physical peculiarities which distinguish it from Arabia and
the great African desert. Compare _Heeren's African Nations_,
vol. ii. p. 58; _Reynier_, _Economie des Arabes_, p. 3; _Postan's
on the Nile and Indus_, in _Journal of Asiatic Society_, vol. vii.
p. 275; and on the difference between the soil of the Nile and
that of the surrounding desert, see _Volney_, _Voyage en Syrie et
en Egypte_, vol. i. p. 14.

[55] 'The average breadth of the valley from one mountain-range to the
other, between Cairo in Lower, and Edfoo in Upper Egypt, is only
about seven miles; and that of the cultivable land, whose limits
depend on the inundation, scarcely exceeds five and a half.'
_Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians_, vol. i. p. 216. According to
Gerard, 'the mean width of the valley between Syene and Cairo is
about nine miles.' Note in _Heeren's African Nations_, vol. ii.
p. 62.

[56] I will give one instance of this from an otherwise sensible writer,
and a man too of considerable learning: 'As to the physical
knowledge of the Egyptians, their cotemporaries gave them credit
for the astonishing power of their magic; and as we cannot suppose
that the instances recorded in Scripture were to be attributed to
the exertion of supernatural powers, we must conclude that they
were in possession of a more intimate knowledge of the laws and
combinations of nature than what is professed by the most learned
men of the present age.' _Hamilton's Ægyptiaca_, pp. 61, 62. It is
a shame that such nonsense should be written in the nineteenth
century: and yet a still more recent author (_Vyse on the
Pyramids_, vol. i. p. 28) assures us that 'the Egyptians, for
especial purposes, were endowed with great wisdom and science.'
Science properly so called, the Egyptians had none; and as to
their wisdom, it was considerable enough to distinguish them from
barbarous nations like the old Hebrews, but it was inferior to
that of the Greeks, and it was of course immeasurably below that
of modern Europe.

These considerations clearly prove that of the two primary causes of civilization, the fertility of the soil is the one which in the ancient world exercised most influence. But in European civilization, the other great cause, that is to say, climate, has been the most powerful; and this, as we have seen, produces an effect partly on the capacity of the labourer for work, partly on the regularity or irregularity of his habits. The difference in the result has curiously corresponded with the difference in the cause. For, although all civilization must have for its antecedent the accumulation of wealth, still what subsequently occurs will be in no small degree determined by the conditions under which the accumulation took place. In Asia, and in Africa, the condition was a fertile soil, causing an abundant return; in Europe, it was a happier climate, causing more successful labour. In the former case, the effect depends on the relation between the soil and its produce; in other words, the mere operation of one part of external nature upon another. In the latter case, the effect depends on the relation between the climate and the labourer; that is, the operation of external nature not upon itself, but upon man. Of these two classes of relations, the first, being the less complicated, is the less liable to disturbance, and therefore came sooner into play. Hence it is, that, in the march of civilization, the priority is unquestionably due to the most fertile parts of Asia and Africa. But although their civilization was the earliest, it was very far, indeed, from being the best or most permanent. Owing to circumstances which I shall presently state, the only progress which is really effective depends, not upon the bounty of nature, but upon the energy of man. Therefore it is, that the civilization of Europe, which, in its earliest stage, was governed by climate, has shown a capacity of development unknown to those civilizations which were originated by soil. For the powers of nature, notwithstanding their apparent magnitude, are limited and stationary; at all events, we have not the slightest proof that they have ever increased, or that they will ever be able to increase. But the powers of man, so far as experience and analogy can guide us, are unlimited; nor are we possessed of any evidence which authorizes us to assign even an imaginary boundary at which the human intellect will, of necessity, be brought to a stand. And as this power which the mind possesses of increasing its own resources, is a peculiarity confined to man, and one eminently distinguishing him from what is commonly called external nature, it becomes evident that the agency of climate, which gives him wealth by stimulating his labour, is more favourable to his ultimate progress than the agency of soil, which likewise gives him wealth, but which does so, not by exciting his energies, but by virtue of a mere physical relation between the character of the soil and the quantity or value of the produce that it almost spontaneously affords.

Thus far as to the different ways in which climate and soil affect the creation of wealth. But another point of equal, or perhaps of superior, importance remains behind. After the wealth has been created, a question arises as to how it is to be distributed; that is to say, what proportion is to go to the upper classes, and what to the lower. In an advanced stage of society, this depends upon several circumstances of great complexity, and which it is not necessary here to examine.[57] But in a very early stage of society, and before its later and refined complications have begun, it may, I think, be proved that the distribution of wealth is, like its creation, governed entirely by physical laws; and that those laws are moreover so active as to have invariably kept a vast majority of the inhabitants of the fairest portion of the globe in a condition of constant and inextricable poverty. If this can be demonstrated, the immense importance of such laws is manifest. For since wealth is an undoubted source of power, it is evident that, supposing other things equal, an inquiry into the distribution of wealth is an inquiry into the distribution of power, and, as such, will throw great light on the origin of those social and political inequalities, the play and opposition of which form a considerable part of the history of every civilized country.

[57] Indeed many of them are still unknown; for, as M. Rey justly
observes, most writers pay too exclusive an attention to the
production of wealth, and neglect the laws of its distribution.
_Rey_, _Science Sociale_, vol. iii. p. 271. In confirmation of
this, I may mention the theory of rent, which was only discovered
about half a century ago, and which is connected with so many
subtle arguments that it is not yet generally adopted; and even
some of its advocates have shown themselves unequal to defending
their own cause. The great law of the ratio between the cost of
labour and the profits of stock, is the highest generalization we
have reached respecting the distribution of wealth; but it cannot
be consistently admitted by anyone who holds that rent enters into
price.

If we take a general view of this subject, we may say that after the creation and accumulation of wealth have once fairly begun, it will be distributed among two classes, those who labour, and those who do not labour; the latter being, as a class, the more able, the former the more numerous. The fund by which both classes are supported is immediately created by the lower class, whose physical energies are directed, combined, and as it were economized, by the superior skill of the upper class. The reward of the workmen is called their wages; the reward of the contrivers is called their profits. At a later period, there will arise what may be called the saving class; that is, a body of men who neither contrive nor work, but lend their accumulations to those who contrive, and in return for the loan, receive a part of that reward which belongs to the contriving class. In this case, the members of the saving class are rewarded for their abstinence in refraining from spending their accumulations, and this reward is termed the interest of their money; so that there is made a threefold division--Interest, Profits, and Wages. But this is a subsequent arrangement, which can only take place to any extent when wealth has been considerably accumulated; and in the stage of society we are now considering, this third, or saving class, can hardly be said to have a separate existence.[58] For our present purpose, therefore, it is enough to ascertain what those natural laws are, which, as soon as wealth is accumulated, regulate the proportion in which it is distributed to the two classes of labourers and employers.

Now, it is evident that wages being the price paid for labour, the rate of wages must, like the price of all other commodities, vary according to the changes in the market. If the supply of labourers outstrips the demand, wages will fall; if the demand exceeds the supply, they will rise. Supposing, therefore, that in any country there is a given amount of wealth to be divided between employers and workmen, every increase in the number of the workmen will tend to lessen the average reward each can receive. And if we set aside those disturbing causes by which all general views are affected, it will be found that, in the long-run, the question of wages is a question of population; for although the total sum of the wages actually paid depends upon the largeness of the fund from which they are drawn, still the amount of wages received by each man must diminish as the claimants increase, unless, owing to other circumstances, the fund itself should so advance as to keep pace with the greater demands made upon it.[59]

[58] In a still more advanced stage, there is a fourth division of
wealth, and part of the produce of labour is absorbed by rent.
This, however, is not an element of price, but a consequence of it;
and in the ordinary march of affairs, considerable time must elapse
before it can begin. Rent, in the proper sense of the word, is the
price paid for using the natural and indestructible powers of the
soil, and must not be confused with rent commonly so called; for
this last also includes the profits of stock. I notice this,
because several of the opponents of Ricardo have placed the
beginning of rent too early, by overlooking the fact that apparent
rent is very often profits disguised.

[59] 'Wages depend, then, on the proportion between the number of the
labouring population, and the capital or other funds devoted to the
purchase of labour; we will say, for shortness, the capital. If
wages are higher at one time or place than at another, if the
subsistence and comfort of the class of hired labourers are more
ample, it is, and can be, for no other reason than because capital
bears a greater proportion to population. It is not the absolute
amount of accumulation or of production that is of importance to
the labouring class; it is not the amount even of the funds
destined for distribution among the labourers; it is the proportion
between those funds and the numbers among whom they are shared. The
condition of the class can be bettered in no other way than by
altering that proportion to their advantage; and every scheme for
their benefit which does not proceed on this as its foundation, is,
for all permanent purposes, a delusion.' _Mill's Principles of
Political Economy_, 1849, vol. i. p. 425. See also vol. ii.
pp. 264, 265, and _M'Culloch's Political Economy_, pp. 379, 380.
Ricardo, in his _Essay on the Influence of a Low Price of Corn_,
has stated, with his usual terseness, the three possible forms of
this question: 'The rise or fall of wages is common to all states
of society, whether it be the stationary, the advancing, or the
retrograde state. In the stationary state, it is regulated wholly
by the increase or falling-off of the population. In the advancing
state, it depends on whether the capital or the population advance
at the more rapid course. In the retrograde state, it depends on
whether population or capital decrease with the greater rapidity.'
_Ricardo's Works_, p. 379.

To know the circumstances most favourable to the increase of what may be termed the wages-fund is a matter of great moment, but is one with which we are not immediately concerned. The question we have now before us, regards not the accumulation of wealth, but its distribution; and the object is, to ascertain what those physical conditions are, which, by encouraging a rapid growth of population, over-supply the labour market, and thus keep the average rate of wages at a very low point.

Of all the physical agents by which the increase of the labouring classes is affected, that of food is the most active and universal. If two countries, equal in all other respects, differ solely in this--that in one the national food is cheap and abundant, and in the other scarce and dear, the population of the former country will inevitably increase more rapidly than the population of the latter.[60] And, by a parity of reasoning, the average rate of wages will be lower in the former than in the latter, simply because the labour-market will be more amply stocked.[61] An inquiry, therefore, into the physical laws on which the food of different countries depends, is, for our present purpose, of the greatest importance; and fortunately it is one respecting which we are able, in the present state of chemistry and physiology, to arrive at some precise and definite conclusions.

[60] The standard of comfort being of course supposed the same.

[61] 'No point is better established, than that the supply of labourers
will always ultimately be in proportion to the means of supporting
them.' _Principles of Political Economy_, chap. xxi. in _Ricardo's
Works_, p. 176. Compare _Smith's Wealth of Nations_, book i.
chap. xi. p. 86, and _M'Culloch's Political Economy_, p. 222.

The food consumed by man produces two, and only two, effects necessary to his existence. These are, first to supply him with that animal heat without which the functions of life would stop; and secondly, to repair the waste constantly taking place in his tissues, that is, in the mechanism of his frame. For each of these separate purposes there is a separate food. The temperature of our body is kept up by substances which contain no nitrogen, and are called non-azotized; the incessant decay in our organism is repaired by what are known as azotized substances, in which nitrogen is always found.[62] In the former case, the carbon of non-azotized food combines with the oxygen we take in, and gives rise to that internal combustion by which our animal heat is renewed. In the latter case, nitrogen having little affinity for oxygen,[63] the nitrogenous or azotized food is, as it were, guarded against combustion;[64] and being thus preserved, is able to perform its duty of repairing the tissues, and supplying those losses which the human organism constantly suffers in the wear and tear of daily life.

[62] The division of food into azotized and non-azotized is said to have
been first pointed out by Magendie. See _Müller's Physiology_,
vol. i. p. 525. It is now recognised by most of the best
authorities. See, for instance, _Liebig's Animal Chemistry_,
p. 134; _Carpenter's Human Physiology_, p. 685; _Brande's
Chemistry_, vol. ii. pp. 1218, 1870. The first tables of food
constructed according to it were by Boussingault; see an elaborate
essay by Messrs. Lawes and Gilbert on _The Composition of Foods_,
in _Report of British Association for 1852_, p. 323: but the
experiments made by these gentlemen are neither numerous nor
diversified enough to establish a general law; still less can we
accept their singular assertion, p. 346, that the comparative
prices of different foods are a test of the nutriment they
comparatively contain.

[63] 'Of all the elements of the animal body, nitrogen has the feeblest
attraction for oxygen; and, what is still more remarkable, it
deprives all combustible elements with which it combines, to a
greater or less extent, of the power of combining with oxygen, that
is, of undergoing combustion.' _Liebig's Letters on Chemistry_,
p. 372.

[64] The doctrine of what may be called the protecting power of some
substances is still imperfectly understood, and until late in the
eighteenth century, its existence was hardly suspected. It is now
known to be connected with the general theory of poisons. See
_Turner's Chemistry_, vol. i. p. 516. To this we must probably
ascribe the fact that several poisons which are fatal when applied
to a wounded surface, may be taken into the stomach with impunity.
_Brodie's Physiological Researches_, 1851, pp. 137, 138. It seems
more reasonable to refer this to chemical laws than to hold, with
Sir Benjamin Brodie, that some poisons 'destroy life by paralysing
the muscles of respiration without immediately affecting the
action of the heart.'

These are the two great divisions of food;[65] and if we inquire into the laws which regulate the relation they bear to man, we shall find that in each division the most important agent is climate. When men live in a hot country, their animal heat is more easily kept up than when they live in a cold one; therefore they require a smaller amount of that non-azotized food, the sole business of which is to maintain at a certain point the temperature of the body. In the same way, they, in the hot country, require a smaller amount of azotized food, because on the whole their bodily exertions are less frequent, and on that account the decay of their tissues is less rapid.[66]

[65] Prout's well-known division into saccharine, oily, and albuminous,
appears to me of much inferior value, though I observe that it is
adopted in the last edition of _Elliotson's Human Physiology_,
pp. 65, 160. The division by M. Lepelletier into 'les alimens
solides et les boissons' is of course purely empirical.
_Lepelletier_, _Physiologie Médicale_, vol. ii. p. 100, Paris,
1832. In regard to Prout's classification, compare _Burdach's
Traité de Physiologie_, vol. ix. p. 240, with _Wagner's
Physiology_, p. 452.

[66] The evidence of an universal connexion in the animal frame between
exertion and decay, is now almost complete. In regard to the
muscular system, see _Carpenter's Human Physiology_, pp. 440, 441,
581, edit. 1846: 'there is strong reason to believe the waste or
decomposition of the muscular tissue to be in exact proportion to
the degree in which it is exerted.' This perhaps would be generally
anticipated even in the absence of direct proof; but what is more
interesting, is that the same principle holds good of the nervous
system. The human brain of an adult contains about one and a half
per cent of phosphorus; and it has been ascertained, that after
the mind has been much exercised, phosphates are excreted, and
that in the case of inflammation of the brain their excretion (by
the kidneys) is very considerable. See _Paget's Lectures on
Surgical Pathology_, 1853, vol. i. pp. 6, 7, 434; _Carpenter's
Human Physiology_, pp. 192, 193, 222; _Simon's Animal Chemistry_,
vol. ii. p. 426; _Henle_, _Anatomie Générale_, vol. ii. p. 172.
The reader may also consult respecting the phosphorus of the brain
the recent very able work of MM. Robin et Verdeil, _Chimie
Anatomique_, vol. i. p. 215, vol. ii. p. 348, Paris, 1853.
According to these writers (vol. iii. p. 445), its existence in
the brain was first announced by Hensing, in 1779.

Since, therefore, the inhabitants of hot climates do, in their natural and ordinary state, consume less food than the inhabitants of cold ones, it inevitably follows that, provided other things remain equal, the growth of population will be more rapid in countries which are hot than in those which are cold. For practical purposes, it is immaterial whether the greater plenty of a substance by which the people are fed arises from a larger supply, or whether it arises from a smaller consumption. When men eat less, the result will be just the same as if they had more; because the same amount of nutriment will go farther, and thus population will gain a power of increasing more quickly than it could do in a colder country, where, even if provisions were equally abundant, they, owing to the climate, would be sooner exhausted.

This is the first point of view in which the laws of climate are, through the medium of food, connected with the laws of population, and therefore with the laws of the distribution of wealth. But there is also another point of view, which follows the same line of thought, and will be found to strengthen the argument just stated. This is, that in cold countries, not only are men compelled to eat more than in hot ones, but their food is dearer, that is to say, to get it is more difficult, and requires a greater expenditure of labour. The reason of this I will state as briefly as possible, without entering into any details beyond those which are absolutely necessary for a right understanding of this interesting subject.

The objects of food are, as we have seen, only two: namely, to keep up the warmth of the body, and repair the waste in the tissues.[67] Of these two objects, the former is effected by the oxygen of the air entering our lungs, and, as it travels through the system, combining with the carbon which we take in our food.[68] This combination of oxygen and carbon never can occur without producing a considerable amount of heat, and it is in this way that the human frame is maintained at its necessary temperature.[69] By virtue of a law familiar to chemists, carbon and oxygen, like all other elements, will only unite in certain definite proportions;[70] so that to keep up a healthy balance, it is needful that the food which contains the carbon should vary according to the amount of oxygen taken in: while it is equally needful that we should increase the quantity of both of these constituents whenever a greater external cold lowers the temperature of the body. Now it is obvious that in a very cold climate, this necessity of providing a nutriment more highly carbonized will arise in two distinct ways. In the first place, the air being denser, men imbibe at each inspiration a greater volume of oxygen than they would do in a climate where the air is rarefied by heat.[71] In the second place, cold accelerates their respiration, and thus obliging them to inhale more frequently than the inhabitants of hot countries, increases the amount of oxygen which they on an average take in.[72] On both these grounds the consumption of oxygen becomes greater: it is therefore requisite that the consumption of carbon should also be greater; since by the union of these two elements in certain definite proportions, the temperature of the body and the balance of the human frame can alone be maintained.[73]

[67] Though both objects are equally essential, the former is usually
the more pressing; and it has been ascertained by experiment, what
we should expect from theory, that when animals are starved to
death, there is a progressive decline in the temperature of their
bodies; so that the proximate cause of death by starvation is not
weakness, but cold. See _Williams's Principles of Medicine_,
p. 36; and on the connexion between the loss of animal heat and
the appearance of _rigor mortis_ in the contractile parts of the
body, see _Vogel's Pathological Anatomy of the Human Body_, p. 532.
Compare the important and thoughtful work of Burdach, _Physiologie
comme Science d'Observation_, vol. v. pp. 144, 436, vol. ix.
p. 231.

[68] Until the last twenty or five-and-twenty years, it used to be
supposed that this combination took place in the lungs; but more
careful experiments have made it probable that the oxygen unites
with the carbon in the circulation, and that the blood-corpuscules
are the carriers of the oxygen. Compare _Liebig's Animal
Chemistry_, p. 78; _Letters on Chemistry_, pp. 335, 336; _Turner's
Chemistry_, vol. ii. p. 1319; _Müller's Physiology_, vol. i.
pp. 92, 159. That the combination does not take place in the
air-cells is moreover proved by the fact that the lungs are not
hotter than other parts of the body. See _Müller_, vol. i. p. 348;
_Thomson's Animal Chemistry_, p. 633; and _Brodie's Physiol.
Researches_, p. 33. Another argument in favour of the red
corpuscules being the carriers of oxygen, is that they are most
abundant in those classes of the vertebrata which maintain the
highest temperature; while the blood of invertebrata contains very
few of them; and it has been doubted if they even exist in the
lower articulata and mollusca. See _Carpenter's Human Physiol._
pp. 109, 532; _Grant's Comparative Anatomy_, p. 472; _Elliotson's
Human Physiol._ p. 159. In regard to the different dimensions of
corpuscules, see _Henle_, _Anatomie Générale_, vol. i. pp. 457-467,
494, 495; _Blainville_, _Physiologie Comparée_, vol. i. pp. 298,
299, 301-304; _Milne Edwards_, _Zoologie_, part i. pp. 54-56;
_Fourth Report of British Association_, pp. 117, 118; _Simon's
Animal Chemistry_, vol. i. pp. 103, 104; and, above all, the
important observations of Mr. Gulliver (_Carpenter_, pp. 105, 106).
These additions to our knowledge, besides being connected with the
laws of animal heat and of nutrition, will, when generalized,
assist speculative minds in raising pathology to a science. In the
mean time I may mention the relation between an examination of the
corpuscules and the theory of inflammation which Hunter and
Broussais were unable to settle: this is, that the proximate cause
of inflammation is the obstruction of the vessels by the adhesion
of the pale corpuscules. Respecting this striking generalization,
which is still on its trial, compare _Williams's Principles of
Medicine_, 1848, pp. 258-265, with _Paget's Surgical Pathology_,
1853, vol. i. pp. 313-317; _Jones and Sieveking's Pathological
Anatomy_, 1854, pp. 28, 105, 106. The difficulties connected with
the scientific study of inflammation are evaded in _Vogel's
Pathological Anatomy_, p. 418; a work which appears to me to have
been greatly overrated.

[69] On the amount of heat disengaged by the union of carbon and oxygen,
see the experiments of Dulong, in _Liebig's Animal Chemistry_,
p. 44; and those of Despretz, in _Thomson's Animal Chemistry_,
p. 634. Just in the same way, we find that the temperature of
plants is maintained by the combination of oxygen with carbon: see
_Balfour's Botany_, pp. 231, 232, 322, 323. As to the amount of
heat caused generally by chemical combination, there is an essay
well worth reading by Dr. Thomas Andrews in _Report of British
Association for 1849_, pp. 63-78. See also _Report for 1852,
Transac. of Sec._ p. 40, and _Liebig and Kopp's Reports on the
Progress of Chemistry_, vol. i. p. 34, vol. iii. p. 16, vol. iv.
p. 20; also _Pouillet_, _Elémens de Physique_, Paris, 1832,
vol. i. part i. p. 411.

[70] The law of definite proportions, which, since the brilliant
discoveries by Dalton, is the corner-stone of chemical knowledge,
is laid down with admirable clearness in _Turner's Elements of
Chemistry_, vol. i. pp. 146-151. Compare _Brande's Chemistry_,
vol. i. pp. 139-144; _Cuvier_, _Progrès des Sciences_, vol. ii.
p. 255; _Somerville's Connexion of the Sciences_, pp. 120, 121.
But none of these writers have considered the law so
philosophically as M. A. Comte, _Philosophie Positive_, vol. iii.
pp. 133-176, one of the best chapters in his very profound, but
ill-understood work.

[71] 'Ainsi, dans des temps égaux, la quantité d'oxygène consommée par
le même animal est d'autant plus grande que la température ambiante
est moins élevée.' _Robin et Verdeil_, _Chimie Anatomique_,
vol. ii. p. 44. Compare _Simon's Lectures on Pathology_, 1850,
p. 188, for the diminished quantity of respiration in a high
temperature; though one may question Mr. Simon's inference that
_therefore_ the blood is more venous in hot countries than in cold
ones. This is not making allowance for the difference of diet,
which corrects the difference of temperature.