I see no way by which man can escape from the weight of this law
which pervades all animated nature. No fancied equality, no agrarian
regulations in their utmost extent, could remove the pressure of it
even for a single century and it appears, therefore, to be decisive
against the possible existence of^[16] a society, all the members of
which should live in ease, happiness, and comparative leisure; and
feel no anxiety about providing the means of subsistence for them-
selves and families.

Consequently, if the premises are just, the argument is conclusive
against the perfectibility of the mass of mankind. . . .^[17]

Taking the population of the world at any number, a thousand mil-
lions for instance, the human species would increase in the ratio of--
1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32 . . . and subsistence as--1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. . . . In two
centuries and a quarter, the population would be to the means of^[25]
subsistence as 512 to 10: in three centuries as 4096 to 13; and in two
thousand years the difference would be almost incalculable, though
the produce in that time would have increased to an immense extent.

No limits whatever are placed to the productions of the earth; they
may increase forever and be greater than any assignable quantity; yet
still the power of population being a power of a superior order, the
increase of the human species can only be kept commensurate to the
increase of the means of subsistence, by the constant operation of the
strong law of necessity acting as a check upon the greater power.

The effects of this check remain now to be considered.^[26]

Among plants and animals the view of the subject is simple. They
are all impelled by a powerful instinct to the increase of their species;
and this instinct is interrupted by no reasoning, or doubts about pro-
viding for their offspring. Whenever therefore there is liberty, the
power of increase is exerted; and the superabundant effects are re-
pressed afterwards by want of room and nourishment, which is com-
mon to animals and plants; and among animals, by becoming the
prey of others.

The effects of this check on man are more complicated. Impelled
to the increase of his species by an equally powerful instinct, reason
interrupts his career, and asks him whether he may not bring beings
into the world for whom he can not provide the means of subsistence.
. . .^[27] Yet in all societies, even those that are most vicious, the tend-
ency to a virtuous attachment is so strong, that there is a constant
effort towards an increase of population. This constant effort as con-

-4-