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]

423.

trower to ricardo3
[Answered by 426]

Unsted Wood—1. April. 1821.

My Dear Hunter4

Since I had the pleasure of seeing you I have met with an accident that has confined me to the Sofa, and very near cost me my life. This day 3 weeks I went into the stable to look at one of my Carriage Horses, which was unwell; and whilst I was in the Stall he was siezed with a fit of mad staggers, broke his halter, reared up, and before I could get out of the stall, fell down, and, in falling, struck my leg very violently with his head. The injury is on the tendons of the leg, which though very painful, will not, eventually, be of any serious consequence—Had I been a foot or two nearer the Horse I must have been smashed in pieces. In justice to my prudence, I must tell you, that when I went into the Stall the Horse was quiet, and the Coachman with him. I can hobble about with a stick, and I hope soon to be able to resume my usual exercise.—

It gave me great pleasure to observe, that justice was done to the “Ricardo System,” in the debate the other night.1 Upon the whole Mr. Baring’s appeared to be a very able speech; and that part of it which was faulty I think you answered very triumphantly. No theory was ever more compleatly established by facts, than the doctrines, you have taught, have been by the evidence of the last few years. We are now in the right course, and all that is requisite is patience to give time for the natural development of the causes in operation. I have been reading Godwin’s attack upon Malthus.2 It is not written in the true spirit of philosophick enquiry. It is intemperate and abusive; and with all the pretence of systematick investigation, it is a rambling disjointed performance. It proceeds upon a gross misconception of Malthus’ system, and is supported by scandalous misrepresentations of his opinions. As an attack upon the great principle inculcated in the Essay it is perfectly impotent. Whether population will double itself in 25 or in 50 years is of no moment as far as the principle is concerned; and Godwin himself is forced to admit the tendency of population to increase. I have always thought Malthus did not place his doctrine upon its proper basis. It is not the more rapid multiplication of animal life, than vegetable life, which occasions population to out run food, but it is the limited extent of land, and the rate at which it can be encreased—that is to say, at which fresh land can be taken into cultivation. The mere increase of vegetable life is infinitely more rapid than that of vegetable1 life; and the industry of every man, properly directed, is capable of producing much more food than is necessary for his own existence. But, the quantity of land from which that produce can be obtained is limited, whilst the growth of population is not affected by that limit, consequently this growth will have a tendency to run on till it is stopped by the want of subsistence. Of course, this is what Malthus means, but it is not what he has said; and therefore he has laid himself open to the attacks of those, who object to the litteral terms in which his doctrine is delivered.—

Pray let me know what is your opinion of Godwins Book, as I recollect you said you were reading it, when I was in London.—

When is Mr. Mill’s Work2 to make its appearance? What is its object? A new digested system? Or an answer to Malthus? Or new views of any part of the system? I am very impatient to see it. Of course his opinions are identified with your own?—

I begin to hope the Catholick question will succeed in both Houses. Lord Castleregh’s3 language does not appear to me to anticipate any difficulties in the Lords. Is this the case? I dont know how to respect the opinion of any man, who seriously entertains the apprehensions, that have been expressed by the opponents of the measure. But, in fact I dont believe they do entertain them. The real fear is the ultimateconsequences of that spirit of concession in which the measure originates. Test, and Corporation Acts, Tithes, Church Establishment, these are the real foundation of the alarms attributed to “the Old Whore of Babylon”! Dont forget to let me have your Notes upon Malthus. How does your Agricultural Committee come on? What is to be done? Shall you collect any important evidence? Perhaps, as a Member of the Committee, you will be able to procure me a Copy of your Report? I should like to see it very much.—

The Catastrophy in Italy1 disappoints me very much—I had hoped better things from the people. But, if they have really acted in the dastardly manner that is represented, it proves, that they are not deserving a better state of things; or perhaps, it would be more just to them to say, they are not yet ripe for it. To be sure, one good may arise out of the result that has occurred; it will prevent the lighting up of a general war in Europe, which a successful resistance on the part of the Italians might, ultimately, have occasioned. And, I think there can be no doubt, that the general prosperity of Europe, and, perhaps, under all the circumstances, even of Italy itself, will be more essentially promoted by the preservation of peace, than by the benefits of a more liberal government, encumbered, as it would have been, by the evils of war. Rest, Rest is what we want; leave nature to herself and she will work her own cure.

Let me hear from you soon. Mrs. Trower begs to join with me in kind remembrances to you and Mrs. Ricardo, and believe me

Yrs very truly—

Hutches Trower

[3 ]MS in R.P.

[4 ]Notwithstanding this curious slip (or is Trower teasing Ricardo for his aversion to hunting? cp. above, VII, 308–9 and 318–19) the contents and the conclusion of the letter show that it was intended for, as well as sent to, Ricardo.

[1 ]See above, V, 92.

[2 ]See above, p. 291, n. 3.

[1 ]Should be ‘animal’.

[2 ]Elements of Political Economy.

[3 ]Castlereagh had spoken and voted in the House of Commons in favour of Plunket’s motion for the Catholics, see above, p. 350, n. 2.

[1 ]The suppression, by the Austrian army, of the revolution in Naples and in Piedmont, and the restoration of absolute government.