MICHIGAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCE. 
259 
Increase in units of production does not consist merely of adding 
similar units. The saving of time by rapid transportation and inter- 
communication, the organization of capital so that it may be turned 
over several times where formerly it could perform but one service, 
makes a multiplication almost inconceivable, and everyone knows that 
in the land of invention and organization we are just beginning to open 
up discoveries for entry; while the division of labor and the application 
of the processes of efficiency-engineering give a potentiality to the pres- 
ent units of labor that is revolutionary. If we will project our imagina- 
tion, keeping within the limits of reason, we can predict that the rate 
of progress will be continuous. It is quite conceivable that before this 
generation is passed we shall plough with power generated by the tides 
and transmitted by wireless processes, and that radium will be bar- 
nested so that its incalculable energy can be used. With the tremend- 
ous increase in power the. surface of the earth can be enlarged indefi- 
nitely. Why should not the plains of Europe and America be set on 
edge, or why should not artificial heat and light make possible sev- 
eral layers of productive soil, and certainly it can be employed all the 
year round. Already sanitation and invention are making possible 
the exploitation of the tropics, the really productive regions of the earth 
which hitherto have been undeveloped. Men can soon work where they 
cannot live continuously because they can commute in airships and 
change climatic conditions daily. 
In the light of these facts and fancies let us consider the validity of 
Malthus’ three principles: “1. Population is necessarily limited by the 
means of subsistence.” This is more imaginative than dangerous, for, 
since “means of subsistence” is psychological as well as physical, it 
can not become a mathematical term. Nowadays our magazines are 
telling us that consumption of one-half or one-third of the “means of 
subsistence” would add greatly to our efficiency. I myself have made a 
definite reduction in the amount of food consumed and thereby multiplied 
my efficiency. Furthermore, it is undoubted that the science of nutri- 
tion is going to add many units to the food supply by subtracting' 
the injurious, the wasted, and the unnecessary. This is the prospect 
before us, but in the meantime, with all the natural forces for multi- 
plication of population active, nevertheless the means of subsistence 
has increased far beyond any proportions that have before prevailed. 
There is not the slightest evidence today that means of subsistence is 
directly affecting the increase in population. 
“2. Population invariably increases where the means of subsistence 
increases, unless prevented by very powerful and obvious checks.” This 
is so untrue today that it is not open to argument. In fact the portion 
of population having the greatest means of subsistence is standing still 
while the poorest furnishes the greatest increase. To be sure, the 
standard of life may be the line at which the force of the means of sub- 
sistence is defined, but this is a psychological line. The rate of increase 
is not lessened by any powerful and obvious check, and it is not begin- 
ning to keep up with the rate of increase of the means of subsistence. 
There never was a time when the world was as well fed as at the present. 
“3. These checks and the checks which repress the superior power 
of population and keep its effects on a level with the means of subsis- 
