The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• Abbreviations
• 300.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 290 & 299]
• 301.: Ricardo to Murray1
• 302.: Ricardo to Mill1[answered By 303]
• 303.: Mill to Ricardo2[reply to 298 & 302]
• 304.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 295.—ANSWERED By 307]
• 305.: Ricardo to Place2
• 306.: Sharp to Ricardo2
• 307.: Ricardo to Trower2[reply to 304]
• 308.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[answered By 309]
• 309.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 308.—ANSWERED By 310]
• 310.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 309.—ANSWERED By 314]
• 311.: Trower to Ricardo1[answered By 312]
• 312.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 311]
• 313.: Ricardo to Trower2
• 314.: Mcculloch to Ricardo4[reply to 310.—ANSWERED By 315]
• 315.: Ricardo to Mcculloch3[reply to 314]
• 316.: Trower to Ricardo1[answered By 317]
• 317.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 316]
• 318.: Ricardo to Mill2[answered By 319]
• 319.: Mill to Ricardo1[reply to 318]
• 320.: Mill to Ricardo1
• 321.: Ricardo to Mill4[answered By 322]
• 322.: Mill to Ricardo3[reply to 321.—ANSWERED By 323]
• 323.: Ricardo to Mill1[reply to 322.—ANSWERED By 325]
• 324.: Malthus to Ricardo2[answered By 328]
• 325.: Mill to Ricardo4[reply to 323.—ANSWERED By 329]
• 326.: Ricardo to Place1
• 327.: Trower to Ricardo3[answered By 330]
• 328.: Ricardo to Malthus1[reply to 324.—ANSWERED By 338]
• 329.: Ricardo to Mill2[reply to 325.—ANSWERED By 332 & 337]
• 330.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 327.—ANSWERED By 339]
• 331.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[answered By 333]
• 332.: Mill to Ricardo2[reply to 329]
• 333.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 331.—ANSWERED By 344]
• 334.: Brown to Ricardo1[answered By 336]
• 335.: Brown to Ricardo1[answered By 336]
• 336.: Ricardo to Brown1[reply to 334 & 335]
• 337.: Mill to Ricardo1[reply to 329]
• 338.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 328.—ANSWERED By 345]
• 339.: Trower to Ricardo3[reply to 330.—ANSWERED By 346]
• 340.: Bentham to Ricardo1
• 341.: Ricardo to Place2
• 342.: Place to Ricardo1[answered By 343]
• 343.: Ricardo to Place1[reply to 342]
• 344.: Mcculloch to Ricardo2[reply to 333.—ANSWERED By 349]
• 345.: Ricardo to Malthus2[reply to 338]
• 346.: Ricardo to Trower2[reply to 339]
• 347.: Say to Ricardo1[answered By 352]
• 348.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[answered By 349]
• 349.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 344 & 348]
• 350.: Ricardo to Heathfield1
• 351.: Ricardo to Trower1
• 352.: Ricardo to Say1[reply to 347.—ANSWERED By 356]
• 353.: Lord Grenville to Ricardo2
• 354.: Ricardo to Trower1
• 355.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[answered By 358]
• 356.: Say to Ricardo1[reply to 352]
• 357.: Ricardo to Trower1
• 358.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 355.—ANSWERED By 359]
• 359.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 358.—ANSWERED By 360]
• 360.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 359.—ANSWERED By 361]
• 361.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 360—answered By 366]
• 362.: Ricardo to Mcculloch2[answered By 366]
• 363.: Ricardo to Malthus2
• 364.: Ricardo to Sinclair1
• 365.: Ricardo to Napier1
• 366.: Mcculloch to Ricardo3[reply to 361 & 362.—ANSWERED By 368]
• 367.: Ricardo to Bentham2
• 368.: Ricardo to Mcculloch3[reply to 366.—ANSWERED By 372]
• 369.: Bentham to Ricardo5
• 370.: Ricardo to Mill3
• 371.: Trower to Ricardo3[answered By 373]
• 372.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 368.—ANSWERED By 375]
• 373.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 371.—ANSWERED By 376]
• 374.: Ricardo to Mill2
• 375.: Ricardo to Mcculloch2[reply to 372.—ANSWERED By 377]
• 376.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 373—answered By 380]
• 377.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 375.—ANSWERED By 381]
• 378.: Malthus to Ricardo1[answered By 379]
• 379.: Ricardo to Malthus2[reply to 378.—ANSWERED By 388]
• 380.: Ricardo to Trower2[reply to 376.—ANSWERED By 384]
• 381.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 377]
• 382.: Mill to Ricardo1[answered By 383]
• 383.: Ricardo to Mill1[reply to 382]
• 384.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 380.—ANSWERED By 387]
• 385.: Mill to Ricardo2[answered By 386]
• 386.: Ricardo to Mill1[reply to 385.—ANSWERED By 389]
• 387.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 384.—ANSWERED By 390]
• 388.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 379.—ANSWERED By 392]
• 389.: Mill to Ricardo1[reply to 386.—ANSWERED By 394]
• 390.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 387.—ANSWERED By 391]
• 391.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 390.—ANSWERED By 397]
• 392.: Ricardo to Malthus1[reply to 388.—ANSWERED By 395]
• 393.: Say to Ricardo1[answered By 430]
• 394.: Ricardo to Mill1[reply to 389.—ANSWERED By 398]
• 395.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 392.—ANSWERED By 402]
• 396.: Grenfell to Ricardo1
• 397.: Trower to Ricardo4[reply to 391.—ANSWERED By 403]
• 398.: Mill to Ricardo2[reply to 394.—ANSWERED By 400]
• 399.: Mill to Ricardo2[answered By 400]
• 400.: Ricardo to Mill3[reply to 398 & 399]
• 401.: Ricardo to Mccullochcculloch3[answered By 406]
• 402.: Ricardo to Malthus1[reply to 395.—ANSWERED By 404]
• 403.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 397.—ANSWERED By 410]
• 404.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 402.—ANSWERED By 405]
• 405.: Ricardo to Malthus1[reply to 404.—ANSWERED By 408]
• 406.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 401.—ANSWERED By 407]
• 407.: Ricardo to Mccullochcculloch1[reply to 406.—ANSWERED By 412]
• 408.: Malthus to Ricardo1[reply to 405]
• 409.: Ricardo to Mcculloch3[answered By 412]
• 410.: Trower to Ricardo2[reply to 403.—ANSWERED By 415]
• 411.: Malthus to Ricardo2
• 412.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 407 & 409.—ANSWERED By 416]
• 413.: Mill to Ricardo3[answered By 414]
• 414.: Ricardo to Mill2[reply to 413]
• 415.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 410.—ANSWERED By 419]
• 416.: Ricardo to Mcculloch2[reply to 412.—ANSWERED By 417]
• 417.: Mcculloch to Ricardo2[reply to 416.—ANSWERED By 418]
• 418.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 417.—ANSWERED By 421]
• 419.: Trower to Ricardo1[reply to 415.—ANSWERED By 420]
• 420.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 419]
• 421.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 418.—ANSWERED By 422]
• 422.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 421.—ANSWERED By 424]
• 423.: Trower to Ricardo3[answered By 426]
• 424.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 422.—ANSWERED By 428]
• 425.: Tooke to Ricardo3
• 426.: Ricardo to Trower1[reply to 423]
• 427.: Tooke to Ricardo2
• 428.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 424.—ANSWERED By 431]
• Malthus to Sismondi1
• 429.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1
• 430.: Ricardo to Say2[reply to 393.—ANSWERED By 446]
• 431.: Mcculloch to Ricardo2[reply to 428.—ANSWERED By 433]
• 432.: Ricardo to Sinclair1
• 433.: Ricardo to Mcculloch2[reply to 431.—ANSWERED By 434]
• 434.: Mcculloch to Ricardo1[reply to 433.—ANSWERED By 436]
• 435.: Trower to Ricardo1[answered By 437]
• 436.: Ricardo to Mcculloch1[reply to 434.—ANSWERED By 474]

379.

ricardo to malthus2
[Reply to 378.—Answered by 388]

Gatcomb Park Sept^r. 4—1820

My dear Malthus.

I was very desirous of hearing from you and was on the point of telling you so when your letter reached me from Brighton. Mr. Hump^y. Austin a neighbour of mine told me he saw you at Paris, and I had heard of your safe arrival in England. I am quite pleased to hear that your journey has been agreeable to you; it could not fail to be so when it gave you the opportunity of seeing and conversing with the principal literary men of France, and of hearing their opinions on the present state of that important country. I hope in that quarter there will be no interruption of the present order of things for sometime to come, but if they do make a movement I trust it will be for the purpose of securing more effectually the liberty of the people, by perfecting as far as human means can perfect the representative system. There is nothing on which the happiness of the great body of the people so much depends.

I did not expect that I had so many readers in France as the number of copies of the French translation which you tell me have been sold would seem to imply. I am not surprised that you found few who understood my theory correctly, and still fewer who were disposed to agree with me. I have not yet succeeded in making many converts in my own country, but I do not despair of seeing the number increase—the few I have are of the proper description, and do not want zeal for the propagation of the true faith.

I have seen Say’s letters to you1 ; it appears to me that he has said a great deal for the right cause, but not all that could be said. In one point I think he falls into the same error as Torrens in his article in the Edin. Rev.2 They both appear to think that stagnation in commerce arises from a counter set of commodities not being produced with which the commodities on sale are to be purchased, and they seem to infer that the evil will not be removed till such other commodities are in the market. But surely the true remedy is in regulating future production,—if there is a glut of one commodity produce less of that and more of another but do not let the glut continue till the purchaser chuses to produce the commodity which is more wanted. I am not convinced by any thing Say says of me—he does not understand me, and is frequently at variance with himself when value is the subject he treats of. In his fourth edition1 2 Vol Page 36 he says every thing falls in value, as the quantity is increased, by facility of production. Now suppose that you have to pay for what he calls “services productifs” in these commodities which have so fallen in value, will you give the same value if you give for them the same quantity of commodities as before? certainly not, according to his own admission, and yet he maintains page 33 that productive services have not varied if they receive the same quantity of a commodity, notwithstanding the cost of production of that commodity may have fallen from 40 to 30 francs p^r. ell. He has two opposite notions about value, and I am sure to be wrong if I differ with either of them.2

I am sorry that the Government of France is prejudiced against Political Economy. Whatever differences of opinion may exist amongst writers on that science, they are nevertheless agreed upon many important principles, which are proved to demonstration. By an adherence to these, Governments cannot fail to promote the welfare of the people who are submitted to their sway. What more clear than the advantages which flow from freedom of trade, or than the evils resulting from holding out any peculiar encouragement to population?—

I have been reading your book a second time with great attention but my difference with you remains as firmly rooted as ever. Some of the objections you make to me are merely verbal, no principle is involved in them—the great and leading point in which I think you fundamentally wrong is that which Say has attacked in his letters.1 On this I feel no sort of doubt. With respect to the word value you have defined it one way, I another. We do not appear to mean the same thing and we should first agree what a standard ought to be, and then examine which approaches nearest to an invariable standard the one you propose, or that which I propose.

I have not heard of any thing further having been written against you either by MCulloch or Torrens, nor do I know that they have any thing in contemplation. M’Culloch has written me two letters since I saw you last, he does not say any thing about value and it will probably be a year or two before he can publish any thing on that subject in the Supplement to the Encyclopedia. In the next Review there will be an article of his on Tithes which I have seen—his principles are right but I do not like his remedy for the existing evil.2

Mill has been with me here for a fortnight and will stay sometime longer. He has it in contemplation to write a popular work on Political Economy, in which he will explain the principles which he thinks correct in the most familiar way for the use of learners. It is not his intention to notice any person’s opinions, or to enter into a controversy on the disputed points.—

I have been looking over my first chapter, with a view to make a few alterations in it before the work goes to another edition. I find my task very difficult, but I hope I shall make my opinions more clear and intelligible. I did intend to defend myself against some of your attacks, but on reflection I think that to do myself justice I must say so much that I should very inconveniently enlarge the size of my book, besides which I should be constantly drawing my readers attention from the [ma]in1 subject. If I defend myself at all, I must do it in [some] separate publication.

Respecting the trial of the Queen I am more than ever convinced of the impolicy and inexpediency of the proceedings which have led to it, and am quite sure that the plea set up that it is a state question is a false one—it is entered into merely to gratify the resentment and hostility of one individual who has himself behaved so ill that whatever he may have to complain of he so fully merits, that no one is bound to enter into his quarrels or wish for punishment to follow offences to which his own conduct has been so instrumental.

Mrs. Ricardo unites with me in kind regards to Mrs. Malthus. Gatcomb is very delightful, I wish you and Mrs. Malthus could give us your company here before we go to London.

Mr. Mill desires to be kindly remembered

Ever Y^r.

David Ricardo

[2 ]Addressed: ‘Revd. T. R. Malthus / East India College / Hertford’.

MS at Albury.—Letters to Malthus, LXXII.

[1 ]Lettres à M. Malthus, sur différens sujets d’économie politique, notamment sur les causes de la stagnation générale du commerce, par Jean-Baptiste Say, Paris, Bossange, 1820.

[2 ]Oct. 1819 (see above, p. 159, n. 2). In Torrens’s article the ‘error’ occurs on p. 471 ff. In Say’s Lettres, p. 5, et passim.

[1 ]Traité d’EÉconomie politique, 1819.

[2 ]Cp. the same criticism above, I, 280 ff.

[1 ]The point in question was the causes of the general stagnation of trade.

[2 ]See below, p. 237.

[1 ]Covered by seal.