16 TRANSACTIONS OF THE CANADIAN INSTITUTK. [VoL. I. 



these two great facts that arises the contrast between nature's laws of 

 distribution and human laws. 



As the raw material is not a product, so no set of men can rightly claim 

 it as theirs. Equity demands that the rights of all mankind to the 

 natural opportunities are equal. If a man utilizes this right, and puts 

 forth industry, he secures an exclusive right to the product ; but if he 

 exerts no industry, by what right can he claim product ? For one portion 

 of society to claim exclusive right to the raw material is equivalent to 

 that portion asserting the exclusive possession of the planet. 



Every growth of population is accompanied with two conditions^ 

 increased land value and increased common expenditure. The increased 

 land value must be surrendered by the toilers. Our legal enactments 

 determine the destination of that surrender in one of two ways, ist, either 

 to speculators, who appropriate without producing and thus despoil the 

 toiler ; or, 2nd, into the public treasury for the common advantage of all. 

 Only when we have conformed to this simple law of securing to the 

 individual the value he produces and to the community the value it pro- 

 duces can our laws of distribution conform to nature's laws. Nature's 

 laws are harmonious and beneficent, and so long as we set them utterly 

 at defiance social harmony is impossible. 



Mr. Pursey thought that Mr. Douglass had placed the subject in a very 

 clear light ; there may be flaws in the reasoning, but he did not see where 

 they were. He thought that from the importance of the subject, the 

 meeting should have been attended by some of the professors of the 

 science, who would point out the errors and enlighten the audience. 



Mr. Richardson referred to the large amount of wealth that was 

 annually lost through ignorance and unscientific methods of production ; 

 as in agricultural pursuits when the land was impaired by constantly 

 growing the same crop. This was not the natural condition. If there 

 was a proper rotation of crops there would be a constantly increasing 

 amount of production. 



Mr. Jones thought the subject was of importance in its bearing on the 

 single tax question. He read an extract shewing that the theory of 

 Malthus was wrong and that population will not outrun the means of 

 subsistence. 



Mr. Chamberlain : A good deal had been said against the law pro- 

 pounded by Malthus ; in the first place he did not see what the law of 

 Malthus had to do with the subject ; and then as to Malthus himself, it 

 was not quite clear that he understood his own principles. 



Mr. Richardson : Where Malthus was not quite right was that he did 

 not take all the circumstances of modern civilization into consideration. 



