HISTORICAL 31 



feelings, Alison a Tory, and Doubleday a Eadical.^ That the 

 rehgious motive continued to inspire opposition may be gathered 

 from an essay by W. P. Greg which appeared at a much later 

 date.2 



It may be noticed that strong opposition was nearly always 

 exhibited to the views of Malthus by socialistic authors.^ Accord- 

 ing to Proudhon, ' la theorie de Malthus, c'est la theorie de 

 I'assassinat politique, de I'assassinat par philanthropie, pour 

 I'amour de Dieu.' * Karl Marx in a well-known passage attacked 

 Malthus in most violent and offensive language.^ 



9. As a result of the Essay, there began within the lifetime of 

 Malthus the advocacy of Neomalthusianism. Malthus himself 

 definitely disapproved of this practical application of his ' prin- 

 ciple '.^ The practical application of which he approved was 

 made by Miss Martineau in one of her Illustrations to Political 

 Economy, which read so strangely at the present day.' As regards 

 Neomalthusianism it is very generally supposed that active 

 propaganda only began about the time of the famous Bradlaugh- 

 Besant trial in 1876. This, however, is a complete mistake.® 

 The first publication of importance in which these ideas were put 

 forward was an article by James Mill in the Enctjclopaedia Bri- 

 tannica. His language was very guarded but the drift of his remarks 

 unmistakable. Four years later, in 1822, Francis Place wrote 

 a reply to Godwin. He covered much other ground but openly 

 and deliberately advocated these practices. For the next ten 

 years there followed an active propaganda. The events which 

 first brought the whole question into public notice are somewhat 

 curious. In 1823 a number of handbills were sent to Mrs. Fildes, 

 well known in the North for her work among the poor ; these bills 

 contained descriptions of the methods which the new school of 



1 Leslie Stephen, loc. cit., vol. iii, p. 180. ^ Greg, Enigmas of Life, ch. ii. 



' On this subject see Soetbeer, Die Stellung der Sozialisten zur Malthusischen 

 Bevolkerungslehre. Soetbeer includes in his review the writings of Godwin, Henry 

 George, and others who cannot properly be regarded as socialists * Soetbeer, 



loc. cit., p. 20. ^ Marx, Capital, vol. ii, p. 629. 



* There does not seem to be any foundation whatever for .the statement made 

 by Place to the effect that Malthus recognized the advocacy of Neomalthusian 

 methods to be the logical outcome of his position but that he shrank from their 

 advocacy for fear of prejudice. Place, Illustrations and Proofs of the Principle 

 of Population, p. 173. 



' Harriet Martineau, Illustrations to Political Economy, No. VI, Weal and Woe 

 in Graveloch. * On this subject see Field, ' The Early History of the Popula- 



tion Movement ', American Economic Revieiv, April, 1911. I am indebted to this 

 valuable article in what follows. 



