1
10
33
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/f41c0bea132f3744d99274ff7207683c.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=ms4DlxAV9-yjKJKTVFFc56WJ4lBI%7Edhk-SkvF4FeDAEKJHTcACEBV8zC8aWadHB%7EyjbCg%7EMF-lPpvwZ8guuhYKdm2ufJiD9Dq2coYGnx5O1oMl1dHCOVcFSrl0chHD4qG-vwBAqsnKUEM9g0L9C2qw6muTf0PScnySukSuNAW66hsSqLhCpU7w6KXubh6PszI2ybzd2pHhgaLWzYCWBnEtMKUF0kuVmt9kDO1tc8HGoiGqU1FNTYRleSwIGmhIht6NFnGFGW2iHc6pqkaH-hAPgpU8beDCk9dIVg%7E-EQtBC0ysWTzSGNy0BMy8LjVhTwe03Be08IXecn7m7zOdm1Bg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
495c1108718532b63961bbccf0901128
PDF Text
Text
fe 2-5 'y 5
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
POVERTY:
ITS CAUSE AND CURE.
POINTING OUT A MEANS BY WHICH THE WORKING CLASSES MAY RAISE» •
THEMSELVES FROM THEIR PRESENT STATE OP LOW WAGES AND
CEASELESS TOIL TO ONE OF
COMFORT, DIGNITY, AND INDEPENDENCE;
AND WHICH IS ALSO CAPABLE OF ENTIRELY REMOVING, IN
COURSE OF TIME, THE OTHER PRINCIPAL SOCIAL EVILS
BY-
M. G. II.
“ The Diseases of Society can, no more than corporeal maladies, be prevented or
cuied, without being spoken about in plain language."— J ohn Sxuabt.Miu.
ILoniJon:
E. TRUELOVE, 256, HIGH H0L30RN;
REMOVED FROM TEMPLE BAR.
1885.
[PRICK ONE PENNY.]
�INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
This little tract—made as small as possible in order that, by its mode
rate price, it may be within the reach of even the very poorest—is
written for the purpose of pointing out to the working classes, and
indeed to all other classes, the only true means of bettering their
condition. Its object is thoroughly practical, since the means we
advocate is simple, and requires no self-denial; but, on the contrary,
must cause a speedy improvement in the circumstances of the parties
adopting it. And, moreover, if its practice were universally recog
nized as a great social duty (as there is every reason to believe it will
be in time), it leads us to hope that, besides Poverty, the two other
great evils of our country, Prostitution and Celibacy, may be entirely
extirpated. We doubt not that at first it will be overwhelmed with
contempt and abuse, more especially by the “moralist;” but we
firmly believe that after such a calm examination of the subject as
its immense importance deserves, it will be acknowledged to be the
only means of escaping from the manifold evils under which we all, rich
and poor, now suffer. We have thought it necessary to precede the
communication of this means by a short explanation of the principal
cause of the present state of Low Wages, in order that the reader
may the more deeply feel that any scheme, benevolent or otherwise,
for the abolition of poverty, hitherto tried, must either be totally
powerless to effect its object, or, if successful, can only be so at the
cost of inflicting fresh evils, hardly less grievous than Poverty itself.
�3
POVERTY:
ITS
AND
CAUSE
CURE.
L
“The life of our working classes is worse than that of most of the
beasts of burden. They toil unremittingly, at a laborious, monotonous,
and in many cases a deadly occupation; without hope of advance
ment, or personal interest in the work they are engaged in. At night
their jaded frames are too-tired to permit their enjoyment of the few
leisure hours; and the morn awakens them to the same dreary day of
ceaseless toil. Even the seventh day, their only holiday, brings them,
fa this country, little gaiety, little recreation.................... Thus have
the poor to toil on, as long as their strength permits. At last some
organ gives way, the stomach, the eyes, or the brain; and the un
fortunate sufferer is thrown out of work, and sent to the hospital,
whilst his wife and family are reduced to the brink of starvation.
Often, the man, rendered desperate by his hopeless position, plunges
into drink, and gives himself over to ruin. At other times, the
Working classes, in a frenzy of rage at their infernal circumstances,
determine that they will have higher wages or perish. Hence result
the disastrous strikes, and the terrible social revolutions, that have in
recent times so often convulsed society. But they are vain; they are
but the blind efforts of men to do something or die, the fruitless
heavings of a man in a night-mare. The mountain of misery in
variably falls back upon their breast, with only increased pressure ;
and forces them, worn out by impotent struggles, to bear it quietly
for another little season.”
The above extract presents a sad, but too true, picture of the
*
manner in which thousands, nay millions, of our fellow countrymen
are forced to pass their lives. That it is not overdrawn, all belonging
fo the class referred to must be able to testify. Those who earn good
wages, and therefore save themselves and families from a personal ex
perience of the bitter miseries of poverty, doubtless know many less
favored by fortune, who have sunk and been trodden upon, in the hard
struggle for the bare necessaries of life which is going on around us.,
• From “The Elements of Social Science; or, Physical, Sexual,
ind Natural Religion.” E. Truelove, 256, High Holborn.
�4
Were we to ask, “ What is the cause, and what trie cure (if any) ot
¡this sad state of things ? ” how various and how contradictory would
be the replies. Some, and these would be of the richer classes, would
attribute it principally to idleness, drunkenness, or improvidence ;
recommending as its remedy education, the establishment of penny
Banks, sick funds, hospitals, &c. A large portion of th® middle
classes, viewing it from religious grounds, would declare it to be a
visitation-from heaven, sent for our spiritual good; and offer no Other
hope than that all -will be set right in the next world. Other®, of a
more practical turn, lay it at the door of over-competition, and re
commend emigration to the colonies as a cure. From the above,
opinions would vary, in proportion as we descend the Social scale,
through all the gradations ot trades unions, associated industry, socialism, change of laws, down to the extreme of red republicanism, and
a forcible division of the property of the rich amongst the poor.
'Now, in a work of this limited kind, it would be quite impossible
to examine in detail all these various schemes for the bettering of th®
state of the working classes. We must therefore content ourselves
with remarking that those among them that are at all practical, and
that - have had a trial, partial or general, have either been totally
powerless, or, at best, have only had a-very passing effect, in raising
the poor from the mire in which they are sunk. The main question
is, “ How can we raise wages ? ” All else is comparatively unim
portant—for as long as the present miserable rate of wages prevails
(a rate hardly sufficient to keep starvation from a man’s door), edu
cation, savings’ banks, and the like, are but mockeries. Even reli
gion itself is but a poor substitute for food and other necessaries.
No; if we could but raise wages to a fair rate, all the rest would
follow in time, even to the reformation of our criminals and prosti
tutes, who are for the most part driven into those wretched paths of
life Tor very bread.
Inorder to solve the question, “How can we raise wages?” we
must first look to the cause of the present low rate. This, it must be
evident to all, arises from the fact that the number of hands able and
willing to work greatly exceeds the capital for their employment at
good wages; in short, that the supply of labor is too large in propor
tion to the demand. When this is the case, wages will always be
low; and all efforts to raise them by such means as trades-unions and
strikes can only result in misery to both employers and employed«
We do not wish here to discuss the vexed subject of the combinations
of workmen against employers for the purpose of forcing up wages;
we only state a fact which few will dispute, namely, that this means
of bettering their condition is scarcely ever successful, but on the
contrary, nearly always leaves those who have taken part in it in a
worse condition than ever. Equally powerless for good is the plan,
once very popular, of fixing wages by law, at a higher rate than
would be warranted by the demand. Such compulsory interference
with the labor market was -.easily evaded.; but where enforced, it
always had the effect of throwing a number of men out of work. A
�ô>
moment’s consideration wiH'convince us that such must be the result.
Capital is a certain sum which is divided, in the form of wages,
amongst a certain number of men. If, without altering the relative
proportion between capital and labor, we forcibly raise the current
rate of wages, a portion only of the hands may indeed obtain that
advance, but at the cost of depriving the rest of their shares alto
gether; that is, throwing them out of work, to starve, or rely on
charity.
Brom the above considérations, we believe it will be acknowledged
that the only means of raising wages, without at the same time
causing a number of hands to suffer by it, would be to increase the
capital, and therefore the demand for labor, as compared with the
supply.
Now, from various causes, amongst the principal of which we may
mention the application of steam to land and sea travelling (that is,
railway and steam navigation), the rotation of crops and other im
provements in agriculture, &c., this country has increased in wealth
within the last fifty years to an extent and with a rapidity hitherto
unknown. And yet the working classes have by no means benefited
by all this increase of capital. It is quite as difficult for them to gain
an honest livelihood now as it was formerly. The very small weekly
snnas (six or eight shillings, for instance) which we find to have been
the current wages two centuries or so back, may seem to give the lie
to this; but such sums were in reality equal to double or treble their
present value, since food and rent were then not one-half or one-third
as high as at present. To convey some idea of the cost of living at
that period, we give the following table of the price of some of the
necessaries of life about the middle of the 17th century :—
Oatmeal, per quart .......... 1 Ad.
Beef and Mutton, per lb. ... 34d.
Beer, per gallon.................. 3d.
Bacon
„ ... 3^-d.
Eggs, per dozen.................. 3d.
Dutch Cheese
„ ... 2|d.
Sack of Best Coals ...........6d.
Best Salt Butter
„ ... 4d.
Weekly rent of a laborer’s
Biscuit
„ ... l^d.
Cotton Candles
„ ... 4d.
cottage.......................... 2d.
We have not given the price of wheaten bread, because in the middle
of the 17th century it had hardly come into general use, its place
being supplied by .rye, oatmeal, or buck wheat, whose price bore about
the same relative proportion to wages as wheaten bread now does.
Few will be bold enough to assert that wages have advanced in
greater proportion than this. We here speak of factory and other
trade operatives. The agricultural laborer has fared far worse, for
his wages have never considerably varied, during two centuries, from
10s. per week, notwithstanding the increase in the cost of the prin
cipal necessaries. As we should expect, we find his condition to be
worse than any other class of honest laborers, and by far inferior to
that of the condemned criminals. From Mr. Mayhew’s work we
learn that, whilst prisoners on hard labor are supplied with a weekly
allowance of 254 ounces of solid food—that being’the smallest amount
which (according to eminent medical men) can be given consistently
�6
with health and vigor—the English laborer can procure for himself
alter feeding his family, no more than an average of 140 ounces’
that is to say, the honest working man gets hardly more than half
as. 7n}ch
the crlminal, whose allowance is the smallest consistent
with health and vigor. In plain terms, a large portion of the most
hard-working of our industrial classes are half-starved.
If the case of male laborers is bad, doubly so is that of the females
lhe miserable condition of the sempstresses and slop-workers for
large shops is well known. Indeed, so truly appalling is the life they
lead, that instead of wondering at our streets being over-run with
prostitutes, we ought rather to feel astonishment that so many young
women should be found willing to prefer a virtuous life with sixteen
hours daily toil, and barely enough food to keep life in them, to the
degraded course of living on the streets: in which way, however
■shameful, they can at least generally procure an abundance of food.
After such facts as these, and they might be multiplied indefinitely,
let us- no longer boast of our civilization, our respect for religion our
wondrous progress in arts and sciences. Such only tend to dazzle us
and to hide with a gilded cloak the vast mass of poverty, over-work’
and vice, beneath. If all our glorious achievements cannot lighten
the sufferings of our fellow beings, then have they nothing accom
plished worthy of being called glorious.
We are now led to inquire into the causes which have prevented
the poorer classes from sharing in the great increase of wealth which
has taken place during the present century. Such, all our best
modern authors declare to be ovek-pofulation. We shall now
examine and explain what is called the “Law of Population.”
n.
One of the chief propositions of this law is the following:_ “All
animated nature has a constant tendency to increase beyond the
means for its support; ” that is to say, that, however great may be
the increase in the produce of the soil, it will always in old countries
be far short of the increase of living beings, supposing nothing were
to prevent their following natural instinct, and multiplying their
species unchecked. This applies equally to the human race, not
withstanding the power they possess of immensely augmenting the
produce of the soil above the natural yield.
Now, although man’s greatest power of multiplication is not exactly
known, it can be approached nearly enough for our present purposes.
It has been variously stated by different writers at the power of
doubling the numbers in the course of every 25 years, to as rapidly
as every 10 years. We will choose the more moderate rate, and
suppose population capable of doubling itself every quarter of a
century. Representing the present population as I,' at the end of
25 years it would be 2; in fifty years it would have again doubled, 4;
in another 25 years, 8; and at the end of the century, 16; that is, it
would be sixteen times as numerous as at first.
�1
As to the rate of increase of the produce of the soil, it is even more
difficult to arrive at a true result, than in the case of population; but
one thing we may be certain of, that it is very far indeed behind the
latter. For the sake of argument, however, we will suppose that the
produce of this island might be increased every twenty-five years, by
a quantity equal to what it at present produces. No sane man could
suppose a greater increase than this. Indeed in a few centuries it
■would make every acre of land in the island like a garden.
In the table here given we see these two rates contrasted :—
At the end of
Present 25
50
75
100
Time. Years. Years. Years. Years.
Increase of Food .....
1
2
3
4
5 &c.
Increase of Population ...
1
2
4
8
16 &c.
By this we see, that, were it possible for min to follow his greatest
rate of multiplication, at the end of a century he would exceed, by
more than three times, the food for his sustenance. But we know
that this would be practically impossible. A larger number of in
dividuals than could procure food would not be able to exist a week
after food began to run short; which, in the above example, would
occur after the lapse of the first 25 years. We therefore see that the
Mte of increase of the human race must be limited to the very
moderate rate of increase of food; all efforts to exceed that rate being
met by a falling off in the necessary supply of food, that is, by
famine. But though this must operate to repress excess of multipli
cation, were there no other checks; still, in point of fact, it is rarely
that this is the actual one. It is replaced (especially in more civilize^ ■
Countries) by a large variety of other checks. In describing these,
we shall for convenience divide them into two great divisions, the
Positive and the Preventive checks. The former consists of wars,
vice, disease, misery, and all other causes whatsoever which tend to
shorten the duration of human life. The latter, having no direct
influence on the deaths, operates in checking the births, and consists
in Sexual Abstinence or Celibacy, whatever form it may assume.
The priesthood, convents and nunneries in Catholic countries, the
large standing armies and navies of most civilized states, to whose
members marriage is generally impossible; above all, the class who
remain single from motives of prudence, common to all countries, but
most numerous in Switzerland, Norway, a few German States, and
our own, all have the effect of reducing the number of births, and
thus effecting, by opposite means, precisely the same end as is brought
about by the positive check, namely, keeping down the population to
the level of the food.
From the action of one or other of these checks man has had no
means of escape. He cannot choose apart from them: he can only
choose between them. If he follows natural instincts without restraint,
and brings more beings into the world than can find support (making
every allowance for increased yield of the products of the soil con
�8
sequent on improving knowledge of agriculture, &c.), the Stirplus
twist be cut off by disease, vice, or war; unless, indeed, a part of
these evils are warded off, as amongst the working classes of England,
by fearful efforts of industry, which reduce them to the condition of
mere machines. . On the other hand, if he exercise that prudence
and foresight which is peculiar to civilized man, and restrain himself
from begetting offspring until late in life (say thirty), he will by this
prudence procure for himself exemption to a very great extent from
the evils of over-population: but at the cost, besides an immense
amount of unhappiness, of introducing vicious habits.
Had we space we should examine in detail the condition of every
modern state in the world, and show how population is repressed in
each, either by the positive or preventive check; and how in pro
portion to the rarity of the one, we shall be sure to find the opposite
check in force. However, as such would lead us beyond the limits of
á small tract of this nature, we must content ourselves with reviewing
two or three countries where their action is most plainly seen
Amongst the most remarkable is Hindostán or India. Here marriage
is greatly encouraged, by the religious code, which makes the pro
creation of male children one of the greatest merits In the
ordinances of Menu (their Bible,) it is said, “ By a son, man obtains
a victory over all people; by a son’s son, he enjoys immortality; and
afterwards by the son of that grandson, he reaches the solar abode.”
Thus, marriage in India is considered a religious duty; and therefore
the preventive check operating little, the positive one must of necessity
supply its place. The people are so crowded that the most excessive
poverty prevails, and periodical famines have been always very Se
quent. Wars and pestilences have also at times carried off large
numbers. So much for the positive check falling on a race but lialfcivilized ; let us see its effect on a people much more advanced_ the
Chinese.
In China the population is enormous, being upwards of 300 millions
or about one-third of the human race. These vast numbers are
owing to the goodness of the soil and climate, the very great attention
that has always been paid to agriculture, and also the extraordinary
encouragements to marriage, which here, as in India, is considered a
religious duty; to be childless being held a dishonor. The preventive
check having therefore operated but little, the positive has been the
chief one. The most grinding and abject poverty prevails among the
lower classes, together with an untiring industry and hard work, (&
combination which finds a parallel perhaps in England alone).
Famines are very frequent, which sweep off vast numbers, and
infanticide is very general. It is in these modes rather than by wars
(which, till lately, have not been so destructive in China), that the
positive check operates. The check to population from vicious sexual
intercourse does not appear to be very considerable in China. The
women are modest and reserved, and adultery is rare.
From the above two examples of the operation of the positive
check, let us turn to the opposite extreme, where the preventive check
�9
or sexual restraint, is in greatest force, namely, in Switzerland, Nor
way, ^nd several of the German States. We shall borrow the words
of a weekly periodical, which sets forth in glowing terms the pros
*
perous and happy condition of the people of those countries. “ They
are certainly in advance of us in England,” says the writer. “ They
have almost destroyed pauperism; they have no ragged children, nor
ragged schools; the very boys have such regard for the rights of pro
perty, that the orchards are not enclosed, and cherry trees hang loaded
over the paths and roads, without being robbed by the pilferer, or
watched by the owner; not even watch-dogs are kept; each defends
the property of his neighbour as well as his own. The houses are
large and comfortable, two stories, and sometimes three, with nu
merous apartments; and in all the country there are no such cots
hovels as there are in England. The people are all well but simply
dressed; and even the few laborers that live on day wages are as well
dressed, and as comfortably fed and lodged, as their masters; and
work and live in hope that by their savings, which are weekly accu
mulating, they shall be able to purchase a little farm for themselves,
and spend the evening of their days in comfort.” We should remark
that the writer of the article from which the above is taken, attri
butes all these beneficial results to the system of “ peasant pro
prietors” there in force; that is to say, the possession by every
laborer of a piece of land of from five to ten or more acres, which is
Cultivated by himself and his family. Now we do not deny that such
may be a very useful means of raising the condition of the working
classes, giving them, as it does, a personal interest in their work;
still w® assert that alone it would be quite powerless to raise one jot
the poor from their miserable condition. In proof of this, we point
to the description of the state of the Chinese above given, which
shows the results of the above system (for there it is in greatest force,
nearly every peasant being a land-holder) when unaided by sexual re
straint.
The true cause of this prosperity we find in the custom of late
marriages and celibacy, more general in those countries than in any
other in Europe. Indeed, so much is it felt to be a duty to refrain
from wedlock until the man is able to maintain a wife and children,
that in some of the states alluded to, a law is enforced which requires
every person intending to marry, to prove before a magistrate that he
possesses the means of supporting a family; otherwise he cannot
marry. However repulsive such a law may seem to us Englishmen,
born and bred in an atmosphere of liberty, there can be no doubt that
it has effected in those countries all the improvements so remarkable
of late years.
We shall now turn to our own country, and endeavour to solve the
question put in th,e first part of this work, “ What are the causes
* “Family Herald,” for the week ending Feb. 22, 1857, article,
“The World but little known.”
�10
which have operated in cutting off the working classes of England
from their due share of the vast increase of wealth, which has takes
place in this country during the present century ? ” To thia we
boldly answer, early marriages and undue procreation; and in this we
are supported by all the greatest modern writers on the state of the
poor, to wit, Messrs. John Stuart Mill, Malthus, McCulloch, Dr.
Whately, and others too numerous to mention. We are so impressed
with the idea (which has descended to us from the ancient Hebrews),
that to rear a large family is a very meritorious act, that it may seem
startling when we lay at its door all the poverty, misery, and even
crime, so rife amongst the poorer classes. And yet from the facts
before passed in review, namely, the existence of universal poverty in
all those countries whose inhabitants do not practise sexual restraint,
and, on the contrary, its rarity in proportion as sexual restraint is
exercised, we can no longer shut our eyes to the conclusion, however
harsh it may appear, that the large families common amongst the
working classes have not only the effect of dragging down and
crippling the parents who have to toil for their support, but are also
the great cause of the present state of low wages, ceaseless drudgery,
and early death, consequent on an over-crowded population, and too
great a supply of labor in proportion to the demand. As long as the
number of hands seeking work is greater than the capital for their
employment at fair wages, it is vain to expect a rise in wages ; just
in the same way as when the population of a country exceeds the
food for its comfortable support, it would be impossible for all to get
enough sustenance.
III.
From what we have said in the preceding chapters, it may be
thought that we would wish to impress upon the poor and working
classes the duty of exercising moral restraint; that is, sexual ab
stinence. This is the view of the question taken by Mr« Malthus,
Dr. Chalmers, and many other writers; and no doubt whatever can
exist as to the power of this means, if it could be adequately prac
tised, to remove poverty and want in England. But, with all due
deference to such eminent authorities, we cannot refrain from ex
pressing our firm conviction that such a remedy for poverty is almost,
if not quite, as bad as the disease it would cure. Our endeavours
should be not merely directed to the removal of poverty, which is but
one form of human misery, but to the much larger question of a re
moval of all the causes of unhappiness. If we remove one only to
replace it by another as bad, then have we done no real good.
This subject—the evils of moral restraint or sexual abstinence
will require a little careful examination; as, although we all feel by
instinct that it is an evil, yet (from its very nature causing its victims
to hide their sufferings) it is much less capable of being clearly de
fined and put down in black and white, than is that of over-popula
tion, and its natural result—poverty.
In order the better to explain this subject, we shall borrow a few
�.11
passages from the work already quoted from, which, being written
by a student of medicine, who has evidently carefully studied this
branch of physiology, is entitled to our serious attention.
“It is most unwise,” he says, “ to suppose that our chief duty with
regard to our appetites and passions, is to exercise self-denial. This
quality is far from being at all times a virtue ; it is quite as often a
vice; and it should by no means be unconditionally praised. Every
natural passion, like every organ of the body, was intended to have
moderate exercise and gratification. ... At the present, in this
country, abstinence or self-denial, in the matter of sexual love, is
much more frequently a natural vice than a virtue; and instead of
deserving praise, merits condemnation, as we may learn from the
mode in which all-just nature punishes it. Wherever we see disease
following any line of conduct, we may be certain that it has been
erroneous and sinful, for nature is unerring. Sexual abstinence is
frequently attended by consequences not one whit less serious than
sexual excess, and far more insidious and dangerous, as they are not
io generally recognised. While every moralist can paint in all its
horrors the evils of excess, how few are aware that the reverse of the
picture is just as deplorable to the impartial and instructed eye.”
Those who require a more detailed account should consult the work
itself, where also are shown in vivid colors the hundred times more
ruinous effects resulting from the abuse of this part of our frames,
whether in the form of self-pollution, or that of prostitution, with the
melancholy list of diseases in their train ; both of which vices are
sure to be rampant wherever great obstacles to marriage exist.
Let us now view moral restraint or sexual abstinence from a lower,
but, to the majority, more influential point of view; that is, its effect
On the every-day comfort of the working man. It is here that would
be found the greatest difficulty in its adoption; for to a young
operative a wife is a necessity, if he would obtain any of those in
numerable small comforts, without which, however trifling they may
be thought by some, this life is hardly worth the having. Unable to
hire a cook or housekeeper, as is done by the more wealthy bachelor,
he would find it impossible to procure comfortable meals, nor even
any degree of cleanliness in his home, engaged as he is from morning
to night at work, probably far away from home. If the life of the
unmarried working man is comfortless and dreary, ten times more so
must be that of the unmarried woman after a certain age. Indeed,
amongst the poorer classes, such a person is quite in the way; she is
felt to be a burden to her family if she remain at home; and it is
hardly possible to support herself independently in lodgings, except
in the most miserable way. Thus, apart from any other reason,
marriage is felt to be an absolute necessity to both sexes, soon after
their reaching full growth, for the sake of that dearest of all things
to an Englishman, no matter how miserable it may be, a home. The
last remaining objection to moral restraint and late marriage, namely,
the deprivation, during the flower of man’s life, of the two dearest
objects for which human nature yearns—to love and be beloved by a
�12
wife and children—is too evident from the unhappiness it is universally
acknowledged to produce, to nc-ed illustration. Suffice it to say that
by this, the lot of the greater part of the middle classes, especially
the female portion, is rendered so comfortless and dreary, that many
of them would joyfully exchange their comfort and wealth, enjoyed
in solitude, for the poverty of what are called their less fortunate
neighbours, who at least are not deprived of all outlet for the social
and domestic virtues with which we are all endowed. Indeed, so ut
terly cheerless and miserable are the lives of most of that much to
be pitied section of the middle classes, called in ridicule “old maids,”
that we could not have the heart to wish to see the like state amongst
the poor, who, God knows, have as it is but very few pleasures.
“Is there no escape, then,” we are tempted to cry in despair, “from
the miseries inflicted on man by want of food, love, or leisure.”
“There is none,” cries the orthodox political economist; “none,”
repeats the disciple of Malthus; “none,” echoes the religionist. “If
such be the case then, if ordinary political economy, Malthusianism
of the ascetic school, religion itself, can do nothing but tear from us
all hopes of improvement in this world, and content themselves with
croaking resignation and patience under our afflictions: then will we
have none of them.” But we truly believe that human affairs are not
so hopeless, else should we have refrained from opening afresh the
many wounds which torment us. No, there is a means, the only
means, by which the evils of want of love, equally with those of want
of food and leisure (those three great necessities of our nature), may
in course of time, be entirely cured. It may appear at first sight,
perhaps, ridiculously unequal to such gigantic results, perhaps im
moral, perhaps unnatural, but we are confident in being able to meet
and refute any objections which can be made to it, and prove it to be
the only solution to the question nearest to the interests and happiness
of mankind—“Is it possible to obtain for each individual a fair share
of food, love, and leisure ? ”
IV.
The means we speak of, the only means by which the virtue and
the progress of mankind are rendered possible, is preventive sexual
intercourse. By this is meant, sexual intercourse where means are
taken to prevent impregnation. In this way love would be obtained
without entailing upon us the want of food and leisure, by over
crowding the population.
Two questions here arise: First, “ Is it possible, and in what way?”
Second, “Can it be done without causing moral and physical evil?”
In answer to the first question, we reply that there are several
means which have been adopted in this country, and more especially on
the continent, for the purpose of checking the increase of an already
numerous family without the exercise of perfect continence; but we
shall.chiefly recommend the following, as most of the others are more or
less iniurious to the health or nervous system of the parties adopting
�13
them. The following, however, has none of these objections, being
perfectly harmless, easy of adoption, and at the same time not in the
least diminishing the enjoyment of the act of coition. It consists in the
introduction of a piece of fine sponge, slightly soaked in tepid water,
and of sufficient size, in such a way as to guard the womb from the
entrance of the male semen during sexual connection. This might
be followed by an injection of tepid water.
By this means a fruitful result would be rendered Impossible. The
other means of preventing conception which have 1 een employed or
proposed, are, firstly, withdrawal before ejaculation; secondly, the
use of the sheath, or “French Letter;” thirdly, the use of injections
immediately after intercourse; and fourthly, the avoidance of con
nection, from two days before, till eight days after, the monthly
courses—at which time impregnation is far most likely to occur. Of
these, the two first are the most certain preventives: but the two
last, as well as the sponge, are the least open to objection in other
respects.
The second question was, “ Can preventive sexual intercourse be
used without causing physical or moral evils?” We firmly believe
that it can, or at least, that if there be any evil results, such would
sink into insignificance beside the present ones, which, arising as they
do from over-population, are otherwise irremediable. We think a
ealm consideration of the principal objection which may be urged
against the adoption of this invaluable means, will enable us to con
vince the reader that it is founded on error. We allude to the idea
that many entertain, of preventive intercourse being a kind of murder
or infanticide. In order to do this, we must pause to explain the
nature of the act of generation, which, though one of the simplest,
and at the same time most beautiful operations of nature, has often
been considered as a deep mystery and a subject never to be
mentioned.
The fixture human being is formed by the union, in the womb, of
two very minute cells, of opposite sexes, invisible to the naked eye,
called the sperm (male) and germ (female) cells, which is effected by
the act of copulation. When once this union has taken place, the
embryo, as it is then called, possesses life, which is as sacred as that
of the adult’s, and the destruction of which would truly be murder.
But to prevent this union from taking place is a totally different
matter. Before coition the seminal fluid is no more than a secretion,
like the saliva, perspiration, &c.; and consequently it is a total con
fusion of ideas to associate its loss with infanticide, as it cannot be
murder to destroy that which has never existed as life. Moreover,
the curious discovery has recently been made, that every time a
woman menstruates (that is, has the monthly illness), one or more of
the germ cells or eggs is spontaneously discharged, and, if sexual
coition have not previously taken place, it is wasted. So that, if we
go on the principle that to prevent a birth is murder, we might with
equal justice accuse those persons who remain unmarried during the
time of potence (namely, more than 30 years) of the murder of all
�14
the children who might have been bot~n, had they married. Far from
being murder, preventive intercourse is the only possible means of
preventing murder; for that is hardly too strong a word to apply to
the bringing into the world of such a number of beings as we know
could never find support should they all reach manhood. Let us see
if facts do not bear us out in this assertion. In this country, amongst
the poor, 53 in every 100, or more than one-half of the children who
are born, die in infancy. Now in spite of this large amount of mor
tality, those who survive to manhood, perhaps not more than one-third
of those born, still find it next to impossible to gain a livelihood.
What, then, would be the result, think you, were it possible, by im
provements of dwellings and other means of health, to save those
children from an early grave, and throw upon the already over
crowded labor market a triple number of hands? Famine.
Thus, if we know that, as at present, twice or thrice as many being#
are brought into the world as can by any possibility find food, instead
of a crime, would not preventive intercourse rather be the greatest
virtue we could possibly practise, since it would save nearly twothirds of our fellow-beings from the death by slow starvation, poverty, ■
or neglect, which is otherwise inevitable?
For the satisfaction of those who may feel timid in adopting any
thing which they suppose to be new, it will be as well to mention that
Messrs. Francis Place, Richard Carlile, Robert Dale Owen, Dr.
Knowlton, and the author of the Elements of Social Science, have,
in the journals or books edited or published by them, strongly re
commended the adoption of preventive intercourse. It is also openly
advocated by a number of the most eminent foreign writers, some of
them holding high positions in the universities of their respective
cities.
With regard to the extent to which it should be practised, that
must of course depend greatly on the present state of population of
the country, or of the class adopting it; but we believe we should be
near the mark in saying that, under existing circumstances, married
persons should in no ease allow themselves more than two children, at
least in this country. Indeed, considering the fearfully over-crowded
state of England, it would be a noble sacrifice on the part of married
persons to refrain from having any for the present, until the rate of
wages has somewhat risen.
*
The day will come, and soon too, we hope, when the having a large
family, far from being thought a virtue, as at present, will be looked
upon in its true light--that of a great social wrong; and although
this tract is more particularly addressed to the working classes, as
they are probably the greatest sufferers by the present state of things,
and the least aware of its true cause, we nevertheless believe limited
procreation ts be a duty equally binding on all classes, rich or poor.
Mr. Malthus, the discoverer of the great Law of Population, laid it
* Or until the price of the necessaries of life—as bread, house
rent, clothing, &c.—has fallen ; which, as we have before shown, is
practically the same as an increase of money-wages.
�15
down as a duty strictly binding on all, “ Not to bring beings into the
world for whom one cannot find means of support;” but what would
be the result of following that course? Why, to give the rich a
monopoly of those blessings, or rather those necessaries of life, love
and offspring, cutting off the poor from what is now often their only
solace. Instead of the above, we should rather say, “It is a sacred
duty for us all, by the use of preventive means, to limit the number
of our families, in order that we may not prevent our fellow beings
from obtaining their share of love, food, and leisure,” any one of
which is, in the present age of celibacy and large families, quite un
attainable without a proportionate sacrifice of the two others. .
Preventive intercourse, then, is the only means by which it i3 pos
sible for mankind to make any real or satisfactory advance in happi
ness; and were it to be universally practised, it could not fail to
cheapen food, raise wages, and remove the greater part of the vice
and disease for which, in spite of all our boasting, this country is
remarkable.
But although preventive intercourse is the main remedy for poverty
amongst the poor, and celibacy amongst the rich, there are some other
schemes which, tried with the above, would doubtless do much good.
Amongst the foremost is associated industry, that is, the system which
gives every working man in trade a direct interest in the success of his
labor, and a share of the profits, raising him from the condition of a.
mere machine to that of a kind of junior partner. In a similar
manner, there is no doubt that to raise the country laborer from his
present condition of a hired drudge, to that of an owner of land,
however small in quantity, would have a very beneficial effect in im
proving his state, moral and physical. This would require an altera
tion in the laws regarding freehold land, which now render its ac
quirement almost impossible for any but a rich man. However, as
such reforms are for the most part out of the reach of the class to
whom this work is addressed, and are, after all, of little consequence
compared with the duty of limiting procreation, we need not longer
pause to consider them.
In conclusion, we call upon all to throw away false prejudices, and
unite in the adoption of preventive sexual intercourse. By such
means the state of ideal happiness for which we all instinctively
yearn, may not be in time so unattainable; meanwhile, the working
classes can, by the practice of the above simple and harmless ex
pedient, very much better their condition with regard to wages: in
which it is vain to expect a rise as long as the supply of labor is so
great in proportion to the demand, as is the case in these days of
large families and over-crowded population. Working men! your
salvation is in your own hands. If you allow yourselves to turn
from it and lean solely upon socialism, red republicanism, and
trades’-unions, your condition is indeed hopeless; but we sincerely
believe that when once you learn the true remedy for your ills, you
will not be slow to adopt it: and by using every effort in your power
to Spread the knowledge of it amongst your fellow workmen, will
be the means of raising the class to which you belong, from the state
�16
of semi-slavery, ^ith ceaseless toil and scantv food, which is but too
commonly their lot, to one of comfort and Independence.
POSTSCRIPT.
The reader is earnestly requested to do all in his power towards
making widely known the contents of this tract. This he might do
with little or no trouble to himself, by lending it amongst his friends
or fellow workmen, or by leaving it on the tables of coffee-houses,
mechanics’ institutes, and other public places. It must be evident
that unless the duty of limited procreation be almost universally
recognized, any good effected by its practice in raising wages, will be
liable to be counteracted by the earlier marriages and increased pro
creation of those not adopting it.
The 22ndEdition, enlarged by the addition of a Fourth Part, of the
TpLEMENTS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE; or, Physical, Sexual,
and Natural Religion. With the Solution of the Social
Problem. Containing an Exposition of the true Cause and only Cure
of the three primary social evils—Poverty, .Prostitution, and
Celibacy. By a Graduate of Medicine. Price 2s. 6d.; or in cloth 3s.
Post-free.
Upwards of 600 pages.
%
u
Opinions of the Press.
. . si)me respects all books of this class are evils; but it would be weakness and
criminal prudery a prudery as criminal as vice itself—not to say that such a book as
the one in question is not only a far lesser, evil than the one that it combats, but in
\??nse a
which it is mercy to issue and courage to publish.”—Reasoner.
.
. av?xnever risen from the perusal of any work with a greater satisfaction
thrni this. i Ur ^reatest hope is that it may get into families where the principles
w
inculcated by a parent, who will use his authority in the advice to both sons
and daughters, which should always accompany the reading of works like this. And
we are certain that in every case where it is read with care, there will be another
soldier gained to that brave band who are ever encircling the ramparts of bigotry
and ignorance.
**This book is the BIBLE OF THE BODY. It is the founder of a great moral
reform. It is the pioneer of health, peace, ami virtue. It should be a household Lar
in every home. head it, study it, husbands and wives Had you, had your parents,
read a book like this, a diseased, dwarfed, deteriorated race would not now be
wasting away in our country. By reading this wonderful work every young man may
preserve his health and his virtue. Some will say the disclosures are exciting or
indelicate—not so; they are true, and the noblest guide to virtue and to honour.
That book must be read, that subject must be understood, before the population can
be raised from its present degraded, diseased, unnatural, and immoral state. We
really know not how to speak sufficiently highly of this extraordinary work; we can
only say, conscientiously and emphatically, it is a blessing to the human race.”—
Ptepte's Paper.
“ Though quite out of the province of our journal, we cannot refrain from stating that
this work is unquestionably the most remarkable one, in many respects, we have ever
met with. The anonymous author is a physician, who has brought his special know
ledge to bear on some of the most intricate problems of social life. He lays bare to the
public, and probes with a most unsparing hand, the sores of society, caused by anoma
lies in the relation of the sexes. Though we differ toto ccelo from the author in his
views of religion and morality, and hold some of his remedies to tend rather to a dis
solution than a reconstruction of society, yet we are bound to admit the benevolence
and philanthropy of his motives. The scope of the work is nothing less than the whole
field of political economy
.. .
—The British Journal of Homoeopathy. January, 1860. 1 (Pub
lished Quarterly, Price 5s.)
London: K Truetx>ve, 256, High Holborn, W.O.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Poverty : its cause and cure [...], by M.G.H.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16 p. ; 16 cm.
Notes: Published anonymously. Publisher's advertisement for Elements of social science, 22nd ed., on p.16. Full title: Poverty: its cause and cure pointing out a means by which the working classes may raise themselves from the present state of low wages and ceaseless toil to one of comfort, dignity and independence and which is also capable of entirely removing in course of time, the other principal social evils. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
E. Truelove
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1885
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N294
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Subject
The topic of the resource
Social problems
Birth control
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Poverty : its cause and cure [...], by M.G.H.), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
NSS
Poverty
Working Class-Great Britain
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/62ac06460ad4bddd899bb546f6d55291.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=UqI3Lsb7XSPWgXsnwzEqfIUrjALFwL%7EP-B8PwStxibjssB9TRd9orK1OmYCM%7EKaxOrV3R4STi2n3K7XOcFMR4pL4aB%7EUL3SmSPyehhKD-WN-WjVcnXyiGCn6c8ondaD8%7EIZ6wlG-kI%7E33c-v7%7EPuGQqeR6oShmuQRrqODJir%7EEf9J1ZJ-BcMS94LDmLQpjfwYe3E3fgMLc2KL7Q6jo6bMhTW9xME9ratUjW4eF%7EPtDVj1zHZy6sQzB-112NSw0tnCVC4ci3Jaxgzq73SAbRs2dVKwy57YKqrMhVX8yIq5DOhNmIHpQoWbSTZEfaNSqNvtlViGTvEsV8ks%7EgKiAuQkA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
49260617f5ebdb2a4e1980b24e5fb109
PDF Text
Text
V\j trrJ
N57^>
ev'
■
NATIONALSECULAR SOCIETY
��MORAL PHYSIOLOGY;
OR,
> gmf Mfr iUin
ON
THE POPULATION QUESTION.
.
by
: .■■:
'
j.i-kfi sri ifcrtf
*
bailor jJ
. .- 7f tj W aldr.'
*
,1
• ’ •
ROBERT DALE OWEN,
acthob of
"footfalls on
the boundabx of another wobld,”
BTC, BTC.
“ The principle of utility is the foundation of the present work.”
Bentham on Morals and Legislation.
" The diseases of Society can, no more than corporeal maladies, be
prevented or cured, without being spoken about in plain language.”
John Stuart Mill.
A NEW EDITION.
LONDON:
E. TRUELOVE, 256, HIGH HOLBOBN.
�c
*
*» The Frontispiece which accompanies this treatise, represents a poor
mother abandoning her infant, at the gate of the Hotel des Enfans trouves,
(Foundling Hospital) at Paris. The original painting is by Vigneron, a
French artist of celebrity; it was purchased at the price of one thousand
nollars for the Gallerie Royale, and is now in the possession of the French
king.
The Hotel des Enfans trouves, than which a more humane institution
was never founded, exhibits, in its every arrangement, order, economy,
and, above all, a beautiful tenderness to the feelings of those poor crea
tures who are thus compelled to avail themselves, for their offspring, of the
asylum it affords.. No obtrusive observation is made, no unfeeling question
asked : the infant charge is received in silence, and either trained and
supported until maturity, or, if circumstances, at any subsequent period,
enable the parents to claim their offspring, it is restored to their care.
There is surely no sect, of creed so frozen, or ritual so rigid, that it can
systematize away the common feelings of humanity, or dry up, in the
breasts of some gentler spirits, the milk of human kindness. The benevo
lent founder and indefatigable supporter of this noble institution, was a
esuit. . Be the good deeds of St. Vincent de Paul remembered, long after
the intrigues and cruelties of his fellow sectaries are forgotten 1
The case selected is one ofmild, of modified,—-I had almost said, of
favored misfortune : an extreme case were too revolting for representation.
But even under these comparatively happy circumstances, when benevo
lence extends her Samaritan care to the destitute and the forsaken, who
reoart^s f°r a moment the abandoned helplessness of the deserted
child, and the mute distress of the departing mother, but will join in the
exclamation, <f Alasthat it should ever have been born
�PREFACE
I
TO THE EIGHTH EDITION
(Published in London,)
I am requested to permit and to revise an English reprint
of “Moral Physiology;” and I accede to the request,
because the same deep conviction of the importance of the
views and
recommendations therein contained, which,
nearly two years ago, first prompted their publication, has
been still confirmed to me, in the strongest manner, during
the lapse of that period.
Myself a husband and a proprietor of land, my stake in
society may absolve me, in the eyes of those who require
such securities, from the suspicion of a design against do
mestic virtue or social order. For the rest, let the work
speak for itself. It contains the plain statement of a sub
ject, which deserves to be approached in its broadest and
simplest sense; and to be dispassionately investigated, in
connexion with its own physical and moral influence on
men and women, without reference to favorite theory or
political system.
London, September, 1832.
R. D. O
��PREFACE
TO THE FIRST EDITION.
(Published in New York.)
It may be proper to state, in few words, tlie immediate circumstances
which induced me to write and publish this treatise.
Some weeks since, a gentleman coming from England brought with him
two ingenious specimens of English typography. He had been requested by
a Brighton printer, who executed them, to present these, as specimens of
the progress of the art in Great Britain, to some of his brother craftsmen
in America. He gave them to me; I admired the ingenuity displayed in
the performance; but thought they ought to have been presented to some
printers’ society rather than to an individual. I therefore addressed them
to our Typographical Society in New-York, accompanied by a note, simply
requesting the society’s acceptance of them, as specimens of the art in
England.
I thought no more of the matter until I received, the other day, my spe
cimens back again, with a long and angry letter, signed by three of the
members, accusing me of principles subversive of every virtue under
heaven, and calculated to lead to the infraction of every commandment in
the decalogue: and, more especially, of having given my sanction to a
work, as they expressed it, “ holding out inducements and facilities for
the prostitution of our daughters, sisters, and wives.”
I subsequently learned from one of the society, circumstances which some
what extenuate this childish incivility. A gentleman who busied himself
last year in making out a notable reply to the “ Society for the Protection
of Industry,” got up, at a late Typographical meeting, and read to the so
ciety, several detached extracts from a pamphlet written by Richard Carlile,
entitled “ Every Woman’s Book,” which extracts he pronounced to be
excessively indecent; and asked the society whether they would receive
any thing at the hands of a man who publicly approved a book of a ten
dency so dreadfully immoral; which, he averred, I had done. The society
were (or affected to be) much shocked, and thereupon chose a committee
to return the heretical specimens, with the letter to which I have alluded.
�VI
PREFACE,
Probably some members of the society really did believe the work to be
of pernicious influence. Had some garbled extracts only from it been read
to me, I might have misconceived its tendency. But he must be blind
indeed, who can read the pamphlet through, and then, (whether he ap
prove it or not.) a.tribute other than good intentions to the individual who put it forth.
As to the book itself, I was requested, two years since, when residing
in Indiana, to publish it, but declined doing so My chief reasons were,
that I somewhat doubted its physiological correctness • that I did not con
sider its style atd tone in good taste ; but chiefly (as I expressed it in the
New Harmonv Gazette) because I feared it would be circulated in this
country, only “ to fall into the hands of the thoughtless, and to gratify the
curiosity of the licentious, instead of falling, as it ought, into the hands of
the philanthropist, ol the physiologist, and of every father and mother of a
family.” The circumstances I have just detailed may afford proof, that
my fears regarding the hands into which it might fall, were well founded.
My principles thus officiously and publicly attacked, I have felt it a duty
to step forward and vindicate them ; and this the rather, because, unless I
give my own sentiments, I shall be understood as unqualifiedly endorsing
Richard Carlile’s. Now, no one admires more than I do the courage
which induced that bold advocate of heresy to broach this important subject;
and to him be the praise accorded, that he was the first to venture it. But
the manner of his book I do not admire. There is in it that which was
repulsive, (I will not say revolting) to my feelings on the first perusal; and
though I afterwards began to doubt whether that first impression was not
attributable, in a measure, to my prejudices, yet I cannot doubt that
a similar, and even a more unfavorable impression, will be made on the
minds of others, and thus the interests of truth be jeopardised. Then
again, I think the physiological portion of his pamphlet somewhat in
correct as to the facts, and therefore calculated to mislead, where an error
might be of important consequence.
It may seem vanity in me to imagine, that this treatise is free from
similar objections; yet I have taken great pains to render it so.
r. d, a
New York, December, 1830.
�<»•
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
f
■
CHAPTER
■
' *
'
I.
INTRODUCTORY.
I sit down to write a little treatise, which will subject me
to abuse from the self-righteous, to misrepresentation from
the hypocritical, and to reproach even from the honestly
prejudiced. Some may refuse to read it; and many more
will misconceive its tendency. I would have delayed its
publication, had the choice been permitted me, until the
public was better prepared to receive it: but the enemies
of reform have already foisted the subject in an odious
form, on the public; and I have no choice left. If, there
fore, I touch the honest prejudices of any, let it be borne in
mind, that the occasion is not of my seeking.
The subject 1 intend to discuss is strictly physiological,
although connected, like many other physiological subjects,
with political economy, morals, and social science. In dis
cussing it, I must speak as plainly as physicians and phy
siologists do. What I mean, I must say. Pseudo-civilised
man, that anomalous creature who has been not inaptly de
fined “ an animal ashamed of his own body,” may take it
ill that I speak simply: I cannot help that.
A foreign princess, travelling towards Madrid to become
queen of Spain, passed through a little town of the penin
sula, famous for its manufactories of gloves and stockings.
The magistrates of the place, eager to evince their loyalty to
their new queen, presented her, on her arrival, with a sample
of those commodities for which their town was most remark
able. The major domo, who conducted the princess, received
the gloves very graciously; but, when the stockings were
presented, he flung them away with great indignation, and
severely reprimanded the magistrates for this egregious
pjece of indecency, “Know,” said he, “that a queen of Spain
has no legs.” *
I never could sympathise with this major-domo delicacy
and if you can, my reader, you had better throw this pamphlet
aside at once.
* See “ Memoires de la Cour d’Espagne,” by Madame d’Aunoy.
�8
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
If you have travelled and observed much, you will already
have learnt the distinction between real and artificial pro
priety. If you have been in Constantinople, you probably
know, that when any one of the grand seignor’s wives is ill,
the physician is allowed only to see her wrist, which is thrust
through an opening in the side of the room; because it is
improper even for a physician to look upon another man's
wife; and it is thought better to sacrifice health than
*
propriety.
If you have sojourned among the inhabitants of Turcomania, you know, that they consider a woman’s virtue sa
crificed for ever, if, before marriage, she be seen to stop on
the public road to speak to her lover ;f and if you have read
Buckingham’s travels, you may remember a very romantic
story, in which a young Turcoman lady, having thus forfeited
her reputation, is left for dead on the road by her brothers,
who were determined their sister should not survive her
dishonor.
Perhaps you may have travelled in Asia. If so, you can
not be ignorant how grossly indecorous to Asiatic ears it is,
to inquire of a husband after his wife’s health; and proba
bly you may know, that men have lost their lives to atone
for such an impropriety. You know, too, of course, that in
Eastern nations it is indecent for a woman to uncover her
face ; but perhaps you may not know, unless your travels
have extended to Abyssinia, that there the indecency consists
in uncovering the feet.J
In Central Africa, you may have seen women bathing in
public, without the slightest sense of impropriety ; but you
were doubtless told, that men could not be permitted a simi
lar liberty ; seeing that modesty requires they should perform
their ablutions in private.
If my reader has seen all or any of these countries and
customs, I doubt not that he or she will read my little book
understandingly; and interpretit in the purity which springs
from enlarged and enlightened views ; or, indeed, from com
mon sense. If not—if you who now peruse these lines have
been educated at home, and have never passed the boundary
line of your own nation—perhaps of your own village—if you
have not learnt that there are other proprieties besides those
of your country; and that, after all, genuine modesty has
* See Tournefort’s Travels in Turkey,
t See Buckingham’s Travels in Asia,
t See Bruce’s Travels in Abyssinia.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
9
*ts legitimate seat in the heart, not in the outward form or
sanctioned custom—then, I fear me, you may chance to cast
these pages from you, as the major domo did the proffered
stockings, unconscious that the indelicacy lies, not in.my
simple words, or the Spanish magistrates honest offeiing,
but in the pruriently sensitive imagination that discovers
impropriety in either. Yet, even though inexperienced, if
you be still young and pure-minded, you may read this
pamphlet through, and I shall fear from your lips, or in your
hearts, no unworthy misconstruction. .
Young men and women ! you who, if ignorant, are uncor
rupted also; you in whose minds honest and simple words
■call up none but honest and simple ideas ; you who think no
evil ; you who are still believers in human virtue and human
happiness ; you who, like our fabled first parents in their
paradise, are yet unlearned alike in the hypocritical conven
tionalities and the odious vices of pseudo-civilization ; you
with whom love is stronger than fear, and the law within the
breast more powerful than that in the statute-book; you
whose feelings are still unblunted, and whose sympathies
•till warm and generous ; you who belong to the better por
tion of your species, and who have formed your opinion of
mankind from guileless spirits like your own—young men
and women 1 it is to your pure feelings I would speak : it is
by your unsophisticated hearts I would fain have my treatise
and my motives judged.
Libertines and debauchees! this book is not for you. You
are unable to appreciate the subject of which it treats. Bring
ing to its discussion, as you must, a distrust or contempt, of
the human race—accustomed, as you unfortunately are, to
confound liberty with licence, and pleasure with debauchery,
your palled feelings and brutalized senses no longer suffice
to distinguish moral truth in its purity and simplicity. I
never discuss this subject with such as you ; because I
esteem it useless, and know it disagreeable, to do so. It has
been remarked, that nothing is so suspicious in a woman as
vehement pretensions to especial chastity : it is no less true,
that the most obtrusive and sensitive stickler tor the etiquette
of orthodox morality is the heartless rake. The little inter
course I have had with men of your stamp, warns me to
avoid the discussion of any species of moral heresy with
you. You approach such subjects in a tone and spirit re
volting alike to good taste and good feeling. You seem to
presuppose—from your own experience, perhaps—that the
hearts of all men, and more especially of all women, are
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
9
*ts legitimate seat in the heart, not in the outward form or
sanctioned custom—then, I fear me, you may chance to cast
these pages from you, as the major domo did the proffered
stockings, unconscious that the indelicacy lies, not in.my
simple words, or the Spanish magistrates honest offeiing,
but in the pruriently sensitive imagination that discovers
impropriety in either. Yet, even though inexperienced, if
you be still young and pure-minded, you may read this
pamphlet through, and I shall fear from your lips, or in your
hearts, no unworthy misconstruction. .
Young men and women ! you who, if ignorant, are uncor
rupted also; you in whose minds honest and simple words
■call up none but honest and simple ideas ; you who think no
evil ; you who are still believers in human virtue and human
happiness ; you who, like our fabled first parents in their
paradise, are yet unlearned alike in the hypocritical conven
tionalities and the odious vices of pseudo-civilization ; you
with whom love is stronger than fear, and the law within the
breast more powerful than that in the statute-book; you
whose feelings are still unblunted, and whose sympathies
•till warm and generous ; you who belong to the better por
tion of your species, and who have formed your opinion of
mankind from guileless spirits like your own—young men
and women 1 it is to your pure feelings I would speak : it is
by your unsophisticated hearts I would fain have my treatise
and my motives judged.
Libertines and debauchees! this book is not for you. You
are unable to appreciate the subject of which it treats. Bring
ing to its discussion, as you must, a distrust or contempt, of
the human race—accustomed, as you unfortunately are, to
confound liberty with licence, and pleasure with debauchery,
your palled feelings and brutalized senses no longer suffice
to distinguish moral truth in its purity and simplicity. I
never discuss this subject with such as you ; because I
esteem it useless, and know it disagreeable, to do so. It has
been remarked, that nothing is so suspicious in a woman as
vehement pretensions to especial chastity : it is no less true,
that the most obtrusive and sensitive stickler tor the etiquette
of orthodox morality is the heartless rake. The little inter
course I have had with men of your stamp, warns me to
avoid the discussion of any species of moral heresy with
you. You approach such subjects in a tone and spirit re
volting alike to good taste and good feeling. You seem to
presuppose—from your own experience, perhaps—that the
hearts of all men, and more especially of all women, are
�10
MOKAL PHYSIOLOG f.
deceitful above all things and desperately wicked ; that vio
lcnce and vice are inherent in human nature, and that
nothing but laws and ceremonies prevent the world from
becoming a vast slaughter-house or a universal brothel.
You are led to judge your own sex and the other by the
specimens you have met with in haunts of mercenary pro
fligacy ; and, with such a standard in your minds, I niarvel
not that you remain incorrigible unbelievers in any virtue,
but that which is forced in the prudish hot-bed of ceremoni
ous conformity. You willnot trust the natural soil, watered
from the free skies and warmed by the life-bringing sun.
How should you? you have never seen it produce but weeds
and poisons. Libertines and debauchees ! cast my book
aside! You will find in it nothing to gratify a licentious
curiosity ; and, if you read it, you will probably only give
me credit for motives and impulses like your own.
And you, prudes and hypocrites ! you who strain at a gnat
and swallow a camel ; you whom Jesus likened to whited
sepulchres, which without indeed are beautiful, but within
are full of all unclcanness; you who affect to blush if the
ancle is incidentally mentioned in conversation, or displayed
in crossing a stile, but will read indecencies enough, without
scruple, in your closets; you who, at dinner, ask to be helped
to the bosom of a duck, lest, by mention of the word breast,
you call up improper associations; you who have nothing
but a head and feet and fingers ; you who look demure by
daylight, and make appointments only in the dark—you,
prudes and hypocrites ! I address not. Even if honest in
your prudery, your ideas of right and wrong are so artificial
and confused, that you are not likely to profit by the present
discussion; if dishonest, I desire to have no communication
with you.
Reader! if you belong to the class of prudes or libertines,
I pray you, follow my argument no farther. My heresies
will not suit you. As a prude, you will find them too honest;
as a libertine, too temperate. In the former case, you will
call me a very shocking person ; in the latter, a quiz or a bore.
But if you be honest, upright, pure-minded ; if you be
unconscious of unworthy motive or selfish passion ; if truth
be your ambition, and the welfare of our race your objectthen approach with me a subject the most important to man s
W'ell-being ; and approach it, as I do, in a spirit of dispas
sionate, disinterested, free inquiry. Approach it, resolving
to prove all things, and hold fast that which is good. 1 ho
discussion is one to which it is every man’s and every wo •
�11
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
man’s duty, (and ought to be every one’s business,) to attend.
The welfare of the present generation, and—yet far more—of
the next, requires it; common sense sanctions it; and the t
national motto of my former country, “ Honi soit qui mal y <
pcnse,” * may explain the spirit in which it is undertaken,
and in which it ought to be received.
Reader! it ought to concern you nothing who or what I _
am, who now address you. Truth is truth, if it fall from t
Satan’s lips; and error ought to be rejected, though preached
by an angel from heaven. Even as an anonymous work,
therefore, this treatise ought to obtain a full and candid
examination from you. But, that you may not imagine I
am ashamed of honestly discussing a subject so useful and
important, I have given you my name on the title page.
Neither is it any concern of yours what my character is, or
has been. No man of sense or modesty unnecessarily ob
trudes personalities that regard himself, on the public. And,
most assuredly, it is neither to gratify your curiosity nor my
vanity, if I now do violence to my feelings, and speak a few
words touching myself. I do so, to disarm, if I can, preju
dice of her sting, thus obtaining the ears of the prejudiced ;
and to acquaint my readers, that they are conversing with
one whom circumstance and education have happily pre
served from habits of excess and associations of profligacy.
All those who have known the life and private habits of
the writer of this little treatise, will bear him witness, that
what he now states is true, to the letter. He was in
debted to his parents for habits of the strictest temperancesome would call it, abstemiousness—in all things. He never,
at any time, habitually used ardent spirits, wine, or strong
drink of any kind : latterly, he has not even used animal
food. He never entered a brothel in his life ; nor associated,
even for an evening, with those poor, unhappy victims, whom
the brutal, yet tolerated vices of men, or their own unsus
picious or ungoverned feelings, have betrayed to misery and
* One of the English kings, Edward III., in the year 1344, picked up
from the floor of a ball-room, an embroidered garter belonging to a
lady of rank. In returning it to her, he checked the rising smile of his
courtiers with the words, “ Honi soit qui mal y pense ! ” or, paraphrased
in English, “ Shame on him who invidiously interprets it!” The senti
ment has become the motto of the English national arms. It is one
which might be not inaptly nor unfrequently applied in rebuking the
mawkish, skin-deep, and intolerant morality of this hypocritical and pro
fligate age.
�12
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
degradation. He never sought the company but of the intei
lectual and self-respecting of the other sex, and has no asso
ciations connected with the name of woman, but those of
esteem and respectful affection. To this day, he is even
girlishly sensitive to the coarse and ribald jests in which
young men think it witty to indulge at the expense of a
sex they cannot appreciate. The confidence with which
women may have honored him, he has never selfishly abused;
and, at this moment, he has not a single wrong with which
to reproach himself towards a sex, which he considers the
equal of man in all the essentials of character, and his su
perior in generous disinterestedness and moral worth.
I check my pen. I have said enough, perhaps, to awaken
the confidence of those whose confidence I value; enough,
assuredly to excite the ridicule, or the sneer, of him who
walks through life wrapped up in the cloak of conformity,
and laughs, among his private boon companions, at the
scruples of every novice, who will not, like himself, regard
debauchery and seduction (in secret) as manly and spirited
amusements.
And now, reader! if I have succeeded in awakening your
attention, and enlisting in this inquiry your reason and your
better feelings, approach with me a subject the most interest
ing and important to you, to me, to all our fellow-creatures.
If you be a woman, forget that I am a man : if a man, listen
to me as you would to a brother. Let us converse, not as
men, nor as women, but as human beings, with common in
terests, instincts, wants, weaknesses. Let us converse, if it
be possible, without prejudice and without passion. What
ever be your sex, sect, rank, or party, to you I address 1lie
poet’s exhortation—here, far more strictly applicable, than in
the investigation to which he applied it—
“ Retire I the world shut out: thy thoughts call home;
Imagination’s airy wing repress;
Lock up thy senses ; let no passion stir j
Wake all to reason j let her reign alone.”
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
CHAPTER II.
STATEMENT OF THE SUBJECT.
Among the various instincts which contribute to man's pre
servation and well-being, the instinct of reproduction holds a
distinguished rank. It peoples the earth; it perpetuates
the species. Controlled by reason and chastened by good
feeling, it gives to social intercourse much of its charm and
zest. Directed by selfishness, or governed by force, it is pro
lific of misery and degradation. Whether wisely or unwisely
directed, its influence is that of a master principle, that
colors, brightly or darkly, much of the destiny of man.
It is sometimes spoken of as a low and selfish propensity ;
and the Shakers call it a “ carnal and sensual passion/’* I
see nothing in the instinct itself that merits such epithets.
Like other instincts, it may assume a selfish, mercenary, or
brutal character. But, in itself, it appears to me the most
social and least selfish of all our instincts. It fits us to give,
even while receiving, pleasure ; and, among cultivated beings,
the former power is ever more highly valued than the latter.
Not one of our instincts affords larger scope for the exercise
of disinterestedness, or fitter play for the best moral sentiments
of our race. Not one gives birth to relations more gentle,more
humanizing and endearing; not one lies more immediately
at the root of the kindliest charities and most generous lmpulses that honor and bless human nature. Its very power,
indeed, gives fatal force to its aberrations ; even as the waters
of the calmest river, when dammed up or forced from their
bed, flood and ruin the country : but the gentle flow and fer
tilising influence of the stream are the fit emblems of the in
stinct, when suffered, undisturbed by force or passion, to
follow its own quiet channel.
That such an instinct should be thought and spoken of as
a low, selfish propensity, and, as such, that the discussion of
its nature and consequences should be almost interdicted
among human beings, is to me a proof ot the profligacy
of the age, and the impurity of the pseudo-civilized
mind. I imagine, that if all men and women were gluttons
• See “ A brief Exposition of the Principles of the United Society
calledShakers,” published by Calvin Green and Seth Y. Wells, Albany,
N.Y,, 1830,
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
and drunkards, they would, in like manner, be ashamed to
^peak of diet or temperance.
Were I an optimist, and had I accustomed myself to
judge and to admire the arrangements of nature, I should
he inclined to put forward, as one of the most admirable,
the arrangement according to which the temperate fulfil
ment of the dictates of this, as of almost all other instincts,
confers pleasure. The desire of offspring would probably
induce us to perpetuate the species, though no gratifica
tion were connected with the act. In the language of the
optimist, then, “ pleasure is gratuitously superadded.” But,
instead of pausing to admire arrangements and intentions, the
great whole of which human reason seems little fitted to ap
preciate or comprehend, I content myself with remarking,
that this very circumstance (in itself surely a fortunate one,
* inasmuch as it adds another to the sources of human happi
ness) has often been the cause of misery; and, from a bless
ing, has been perverted into a curse. Enjoyment has led to
excess, and sometimes to tyranny and barbarous injustice.
Were the reproductive instinct disconnected from pleasure
of any kind, it would neither afford enjoyment nor admit of
abuse. As it is, the instinct is susceptible of either: just as
wisdom or ignorance governs human laws, habits and cus
toms. It behooves us, therefore, to be especially careful in
its regulation, lest what is a great good may become a great
evil.
This instinct, then, may be regarded in a two-fold light;
first, as giving the power of reproduction ; second, as afford
ing pleasure.
And here, before I proceed, let me call to the reader’s
mind, that it is the province of rational beings to bear utility
strictly in view. Reason recognises the romantic and un
earthly reveries of Stoicism, as little as she does the doctrines
of health-destroying and mind-debasing debauchery. She
reprobates equally a contemning and an abusing of pleasure
She bids us avoid asceticism on the one hand, and excess on
the other. In all our inquiries, then, let reason guide us.
and let utility be our polar star.
I have often had long arguments with my friends, the
*
'Shakers, touching the two-fold light in which the reproduc* I call them my friends, because, however little I am disposed to
accede to their peculiar principles, I have met, from among their body, a
great proportion of individuals who have taken with them my friendship
and sympathy.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
15
live instinct may be regarded. They commonly stand out
stoutly against the propriety of considering it except simply
as a means of perpetuating the species ; and they deny that it
may be regarded as a legitimate source of enjoyment. In
this 1 totally dissent from them. It is a much more noble,
because less purely selfish,instinct, than hunger or thirst; and,
though it differ from hunger and thirst in this,that it may re
main ungratified without causing death, I have yet to learn,
I that because it fe possible, it is therefore also desirable, to
mortify and repress it. I admit, to the Shakers, that in the
world, profligate and hypocritical as we see it, this instinct is
the source of much misery ; and that if I bad to choose between
the life of the profligate man of the world and that of the asce
tic Shaker, 1 should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.
But, for admitting that the most social and kindly of human
instincts is sensual and degrading in itself, I cannot. I think
its influence moral, humanising, polishing, beneficent; and
that the social and physical education of no man or woman is
fully completed without it. Its mortification (though far less
injurious than its excess) is very mischievous. If it do
not give birth to peevishness, or melancholy, or incipient dis
ease, or unnatural practices, at least it almost always freezes
and stiffens the character ; checking the flow of its kindliest
emotions, and not unfrequently giving to it a solitary, anti
social, selfish stamp.
I deny the position of the Shaker, then, that the indul
gence of the instinct is justifiable (if, indeed, it be justifiable
at all) only as necessary to the reproduction of the species.
It is justifiable, in my view, just in as far as it makes man a
happier and a better being. It is justifiable, both as a source
of temperate enjoyment, and as a means by which the sexes
mutually polish and improve each other.
If a Shaker has read my little book thus far, and cannot re
concile his mind to this idea, he may as well close it at once.
I found all my arguments on the position, that the pleasure
derived from this instinct, independent of and totally distinct
from its ultimate object, the reproduction of our race, is good,
proper, worth securing and enjoying. I maintain, that its
temperate enjoyment is a blessing, both in itself and in its
influence on human character.
Upon this distinction of the instinct into its two-fold cha
racter, rests the present discussion. It sometimes happens,
nay, it happens every day and hour, that mankind obey it»
dictates, not from any calculation of consequences, but sim
ply from animal impulse. Thus many children who are
�16
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY,
brought into the world owe their existence, not to deliberate
conviction in their parents that their birth is desirable, but
simply to an unreasoning instinct, which men, in the mass,
have not learnt either to resist or control.
V
It is a serious question—and surely an exceedingly proper
and important one—whether man can obtain, and whether ■
he is benefitted by obtaining, control over this instinct Is
IT DESIRABLE THAT IT SHOULD NEVER BE GRATIFIED WITH
OUT AN INCREASE TO POPULATION ? Or, IS IT DESIRABLE,
THAT, IN GRATIFYING IT, MAN SHALL BE ABLE TO SAY WHE
THER OFFSPRING SHALL BE THE RESULT OR NOT ?
To answer the questions satisfactorily, it would be neces
sary to substantiate, that such control may be obtained with
out injury to the physical health, or violence to the moral
feelings; and also, that it may be obtained without any
leal sacrifice of enjoyment; or, if that cannot be, with as
little as possible.
This is the plain statement of the subject. It resolves
itself into two distinct heads: first, the desirability of such
control, and, secondly, its possibility.
In examining its desirability, we enter a wide field, a field
often traversed by political economists, by moralists, and by
philosophers, though generally, it will be confessed, to little
purpose. This may be, in a great measure, attributed rather
to their fear than their ignorance. The world would not
permit them to say what they knew. I intend that my
readers shall know all that I know on the subject; for 1
have ceased to ask the world’s leave to say what I think
and what I believe to be useful to the public.
I propose to consider the question in the abstract, and
then to examine it in its political and social bearings.
CHAPTER III.
THE QUESTION EXAMINED IN THE ABSTRACT.
Is it in itself desirable, that man should obtain control over
the instinct of reproduction, so as to determine when its
gratification shall produce offspring, and when it shall not?
But that men have not accustomed themselves to free and
dispassionate reflection, and that the various superstitions
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
17
of the nursery pervade the opinions and cramp the inquiries •
of after-life;—but for this, the very statement of the
question might suffice to obtain for it the assent of every
rational being. Nothing so elevates a man above the brute
creation, as the due control of his instincts. The lower animal
follows them blindly, unreflectingly. The serpent gorges
Himself; the bull fights, even to death, with his rival of the
pasture : the dog makes deadly war for a bone. They know
nothing of progressive improvement. The elephant or the
beaver of the nineteenth century, are just as wise and no
wiser, than the elephant or the beaver of two thousand years
ago. "Man alone has the power to improve, to cultivate, to
elevate his nature, from generation to generation. He alone
can control his instincts by reflection of consequences, and
regulate his passions by the precepts of wisdom.
It is strange, that even at this period of the world, we
should have to remind each other, that all knowledge of facts
is useful; or, at the least, that it cannot be injurious. The
knowledge of some facts may be unimportant; the know
ledge of none is mischievous. A human being is a puppet,
a glave, if his ignorance is to be the safeguard of his virtue.
Nor shall we know where to stop, if we follow up this prin
ciple. Shall we give our sons lessons in mechanics? but
they may thereby learn to pick locks. Shall we teach them
to read ? but they may thus obtain access to falsehood and
folly. Shall we instruct them in writing? but they may
become forgers.
Such, in effect, was the reasoning of men in the dark ages.
vVhen Walter Scott puts in the mouth of Lord Douglas, on
the discovery of Marmion’s treachery, the following excla
mation, it is strictly in accordance with the spirit and pre
vailing opinions of the times :
“ A letter forged 1 Saint Jude to speed
Did ever knight so foul a deed 1
At first in heart it liked me ill,
When the king praised his clerkly skill.
Thanks to Saint Bothan, son of mine,
Save Gawain, ne’er could pen a line
So swore I, and so swear I still,
Let my boy bishop fret his fill.”
The days are gone by when ignorance can be the safeguard
of virtue. The only rock-foundation for virtue is knowledge.
There is no fact, in physics or in morals, that ought to be
concealed from the inquiring mind. Let that parent who
B
�18
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY,
thinks to secure lis sons’honesty or his daughters’innocence
by keeping back from them facts—let that parent know,
that he is building up their morality on a sandy founda
tion. The rains and the floods of the world’s influence shall
beat upon that virtue, and great shall be the fall thereof.
If, then, man can obtain control over this most important
of instincts, it is, in principle, right that he should know it.
If men, after obtaining such knowledge, think fit not to use
it; if they deem it nobler and more virtuous, to follow each
animal impulse, like the beasts of the field and the fowls of
the air, without a thought of its consequences, or an inquiry
into its nature—let them do so. The knowledge that they
have the power to act more like rational beings will not
injure, if it fail to benefit, them. They may set it aside, may
neglect it, may forget it, if they can. Only let them show
common sense enough to permit that others,who are more slow
to incur sacred responsibilities, and more willing to give
reason the control of instinct, should obtain the requisite
knowledge, and follow out their prudent resolutions.
If this little book were in the hands of every adult in the
United States, not one need profit by it, unless he saw fit.
Nor will any man admit, that he can possibly be injured by it.
Oh no 1 His virtue can bear any quantity of light. But then,
his neighbour’s, or his son’s, or his daughter’s!
This would lead me to discuss the social bearings of the
question. But, as conceiving it more in order, I shall first
speak of it in connexion with political economy.
CHAPTER IV.
THE QUESTION IN ITS CONNEXION WITH POLITICAL ECONOMY.
The population question, as it is called, has of late years
occupied much attention, especially in Great Britain. It
was first prominently brought forward and discussed there in
the year 1798, by Malthus, an English clergyman. Godwin,
Ricardo, Place, Mill, Thompson, Robert Owen, and other
celebrated cotemporary writers, have all discussed it, with
more or less reserve, and at greater or less length.
Malthus’ work has become the text book of a large poli
tico-economist party in England. His doctrine is that
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
]£)
“population, unrestrained, will advance beyonS the means of
subsistence.” He asserts, that, in most countries, population
at this moment presses against the means of subsistence;
and that, in all countries, it has a tendency so to do. He
recommends, as a preventive of the growing evil, celibacy
till a late age, say thirty years ; and he asserts, that unless
this “moral restraint” be exerted, vice, poverty and misery
must continue to be the checks to population. The ten
dency of such principles appears to me very mischievous;
though, upon the whole, the work of Mr. Malthus, by pro
voking inquiry, will, I doubt not, prove a source of good.
I have heard some of his disciples openly declare, that they
considered the crimes and wretchedness of society to be
necessary—to be the express ordainings of Providence in
tended to prevent the earth from being overpeopled. I
have heard it argued by men of rank, wealth and influence,
that the distinctions of rich and poor, and even of morality
and immorality, of luxury and want, will and must exist to
the end of the world ; that he who attempts to remove them
fights against God and nature ; and, if he partiaJly succeed,
will but afford the human race an opportunity to increase,
until the earth shall no longer suffice to contain them, and
men shall be compelled to prey on each other. It must bo
confessed, that this is a comfortable doctrine for the rich idler;
it is a healing salve to the luxurious conscience ; an opiate to
drown the still small voice of truth and humanity, which calls
to every man to be up and do his part towards the alleviation
of the human suffering that everywhere stares himin the face.
*
It is vain to argue with the defenders of the evils that be,
that, for the present, there is land and every other necessary
in abundance for all, if there were wisdom in the distribu
tion ; and that the day of ultimate overstocking is afar off.
They tell you, that day must come at last; and that the more
you do to remove vice and misery—those destroyers of popu
lation—the sooner it will come. And what reply can one
make to the argument in the abstract? I believe it to be
true, that population, unrestrained,f will double itself on an
* Let me not be understood as charging on Mr. Malthus himself a style
of reasoning he disclaims. I do but remind the reader how easilv weak
or selfish men may pervert his doctrine to mischievous purposes.
t By unrestrained, Malthus and his disciples mean, not restricted or
destroyed by any incidental check whatever, moral or immoral, pruden
tial or violent. Thus, poverty, war, libertinism, famine, &c. are allclteckR
*o population. In this sense, and not simply as applying to preventive
moral restraint, have I employed the word throughout this chapter.
B2
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
20
average every twenty-five to fifty years. If so, it is evidvnt
to a demonstration, that, if population were not restrained,
morally or immorally, the earth would at last furnish scarcely
foothold for the human beings produced.
Take the least rapid of the above rates of increase, and
say, that population, unrestrained, will double itself every
fifty years. That it has done so, (without reckoning the
increase from emigration,) in many parts of this continent
is certain.
Then, if we suppose the present numerous checks to po
pulation, viz. want, war, vice, and misery, removed by
rational reform, and if we assume the present population of
the world at one thousand millions, we shall find the rate
of increase as follows:—At the end of
100 years, there would be four thousand millions.
200 —------------------------ sixteen thousand millions.
300 -------------------------- sixty-four thousand millions.
400 --------------------------- two hundred and fifty-six thou
sand millions.
And so on, multiplying by 4 for every hundred years. So
that, in 500 years, if we imagine unchecked increase, there
would be more than a thousand times as many as at present;
and in 1,000 years, upwards of a million times as many
human beings as at this moment.
It is evident, then, to demonstration, that there is notspace
on this earth for population, under any circumstances, to in
crease unrestrained, during more than a very few hundred
years. We are thus compelled to admit to Malthus, that, sooner
or later, some restraint or other to population mast be em
ployed ; and compelled to admit to his aristocratic ex
pounders, that if no other better restraint than vice and
misery can be found, then vice and misery must be; they are
the lot of man, from generation to generation.
Let me repeat it: it is no question—never can be a ques
tion—whether there shall be a restraint to population or not.
There must be; unless indeed we imagine communication
opened with other planets, so that we may people them.
In the nature of things, there must be a check, of some
kind. The only question is, what that check shall be—
whether, as heretofore, the check of war, want, profligacy,
misery; or a “ moral restraint,” suggested by experience
and sanctioned by reason.
Let those, then, who cry out against this little treatise, be
told, that though they may postpone the question, no human
power can evade it. It must come up. Had the friends of
reform been left to choose their own time it might, perhaps
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
21
With advantage, have been postponed. And it is an imagi
nable case, that prejudice might delay it until a general
famine or a universal civil war became the frightful checks.
But will any man of common sense argue the propriety of
suffering such a crisis to approach?
Malthus saw this. He saw that some check must exist;
and, whatever some of his disciples might say, he did not
intend to be considered the apologist of vice and misery
His theory, indeed, supplied specious arguments to those
who assert, with the ingenious author of the Fable of the
*
Bees, that “ private vices are public benefits
and fur
nished a comfortable excuse for supine contentment witji a
vicious and degrading order of things. But Malthus him
self declares the only proper check to be, the general prac
tice of celibaey to a late age. He employs all his eloquence
to persuade men and women that they ought not to marry
till they are twenty-eight or thirty years of age ; and that, if
they do, they are contributing to the misery of the world.
Now, Mr. Malthus may preach for ever on this subject.
Individuals may indeed be found, who will look to distant
consequences, and sacrifice present enjoyment; even as indi
viduals are found to become and remain Shaking Quakers:
but to believe that the mass of mankind will abjure, through
the ten fairest years of lite, the nearest and dearest of social
relations ; and during the very holiday of existence, will live
the life of monks and nuns—all to atone for a mal-administration of the earth’s resources, or to avert an ultimate catas
trophe which is confessedly some hundreds of years distant—
to believe this, requires a faith, which no accurate observer
of mankind possesses.
This weak point the aristocratic expounders of Malthus’
doctrines were not slow to discover. They broadly asserted,
that such “moral restraint” would never be generally prac
tised. They asked, whether a young woman, to whom a
comfortable home and a pleasant companion were offered,
would refuse to accept them, on this theory of population ;
whether a young man who had a fair (or even but a very
indifferent) prospect of maintaining a family, would doom
himself to celibacy, lest lhe world should be overpeopled.
And they put it to the advocates of late marriages, whether,
in one sex at least, the recommendation, if even nominally
followed, would not almost certainly lead to vicious excess
• Mandeville
�22
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
and degrading- associations ; thus resolving the check at last
into vice and misery. As experience answers these ques
tions in the negative, is it not clear, (they proceeded exultingly to ask,) that vice and misery are the natural lot of man;
and that it is quixotic, if not impious, to plague ourselves
about them, or to attempt, by their suppression, to contro
vert the decrees of God 1
It was very easy for generous feelings to reply to so heart
less an argument. It was easy to ask, whether even the
apparent hopelessness of the case formed any legitimate apo
logy for supine indifference ; or whether, where we cannot
cure, we are absolved from the duty of alleviating. But it
was not very easy fully and fairly to meet the whole question.
It was idle to deny that preaching would not put off mar
riage for ten years: and if no other species of moral restraint
than ten years Shakerism could be proposed, it did ap
pear evident enough, that moral restraint would be by the
mass neglected, and that the physical checks of vice and
misery must come into play at last.
I pray my readers, then, distinctly to observe, how the
matter stands. Population, unrestrained, must increase
beyond the possibility of the earth and its produce to support.
At present ft is restrained by vice and misery. The only
remedy which the orthodoxy of the English clergyman
permits him to propose, is, late marriages. The most en
lightened observers of mankind are agreed, that nothing con
tributes so positively and immediately to demoralize a nation,
as when its youth refrain, until a late period, from forming
disinterested connexions with those of the other sex. The
frightful increase of prostitutes, the destruction of health,
the rapid spread of intemperance, the ruin of moral feelings,
are, to the mass, the certain consequences. Individuals
there are, who escape the contagion; individuals whose
better feelings revolt, under any temptation, from the mer
cenary embrace, or the Circean cup of intoxication ; but these
are exceptions only. The mass will have their pleasures, the
pleasures of intellectual intercourse, of unbought affection,
and of good taste and good feeling, if they can ; but if they
cannot, then such pleasures (alas! that language should be
perverted to entitle them to the name!) as the sacrifice of
money and the ruin of body and mind can purchase.
*
* Lawrence, the ingenious author of the “ Empire of the Nairs,”
says, shrewdly enough: “ Wherever the women are prudes* the men
will be drunkards."
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
'
23
But this is not all. Not only is Malthus’ proposition
fraught with immorality, in that it discountenances to a latt
age those disinterested sexual connexions which can alone
save youth from .vice ; but it is ineradicable. Men and
women will scarcely pause to calculate .‘he chances they have
of affording support to their children ere they become
parents : how, then, should they stop to calculate the chances
of the world’s being overpeopled ? Mr. Malthus may say what
he pleases, they never will make any such calculation; and
it is folly to expect they should.
Let us observe, then: unless some less ascetic and more
vracticable species of “ moral restraint” be‘introduced, vice and
misery will ultimately become the inevitable lot of man. He
can no more escape them, than he can the light ot the sun,
or the stroke of death.
What an incitement, this, to the prosecution of our in
quiry 1 Here is an argument put forth, wLMi is all but an
apology for the apathy that prevails among the rich and the
powerful—among governors and legislators—in regard to
human improvement. How important, how essential for the
interests of virtue that it should be refuted! How beneficent
that knowledge, wtich discloses to us some moral practi
cable check to population, and relieves us from the despairing
conclusion, that the irrevocable doom of man is misery, with
out remedy and without end ! In the absence of such know
ledge, truly the prospects of the world were dark and cheer
less. Philanthropy herself pauses, when she begins to fear
that all her exertions are to result inhopetess disappointment.
And yet—such is this world—even the ablest opponents of
Malthus stop short when they come to the question, and
leave an argument unanswered, which a dozen pages might
suffice for ever to set at rest.
Let one of the most intellig nt of these opponents—a man
of sterling talent—let Mill, be well-known political econo
mist, and author of “ British L.'dia,” speak for himself:
“ What are the best means of checking the progress of
population, when it cannot go on unrestraired without pro
ducing one or other of two most undesirable effects, either
drawing an undue portion of the population to the mere
raising of food, or producing poverty and wretchedness, it is
not now the time to inquire. It is, indeed, the most important
practical problem to which the wisdom of lhe politician and the
tliorali^ can be applied. It has, till this time, been miserably
evaded by all those who have meddled with the subject, as
well as by these who were called on by lheir situation to find
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
24
a remedy for the evils to which it relates. And yet, if the.
superstitions of the nursery were disregarded, and the principle
of utility hept steadily in view, a solution might not be very
difficult to be found; and the means of drying up one of the
most copious sources of human evil—a source which, if all
other sources were taken away, might alone suffice to retain the
great mass of human beings in misery, might be seen to be
neither doubtful nor difficult to be applied.”—Art. Colony,
Encyclopaedia Britannica.
Let my readers bear in mind, that this is from the pen oi
one of the most admired writers of the present day; a man
celebrated throughout Europe, for his works on political
economy, and whose writings are not unknown on this side
the Atlantic. He considers the question now under discus
sion to involve “ the most important problem to which the
wisdom of the politician and moralist can be applied.” This
question, he admits, has ever been “ miserably evaded.”
Yet even a man so influential and clear-sighted as Mill,
must, himself yield to the weakness he reprobates; must speak
in parables, as the Nazarene reformer did before him; and,
even while commenting on the “ miserable evasion” of a
subject so engrossingly important, must imitate the very
evasion he despises.
*
I will not imitate it. I am more independently situated
than was the English economist; and I see, as clearly as he
does, the extreme importance of the subject. What he saw
and declared ought to be said, I will say.
Before concluding this chapter, let me distinctly state an
opinion, from which Mr. Malthus himself, if I read his doc
trine aright, will hesitate to dissent. I am convinced, that,
at this moment, there is nothing approaching to an excess
of population, absolutely considered, in a single country of
Europe. Iniquitous laws, false education, and a vicious
order of things, are continually producing effects, which are
erroneously attributed to over-population; effects which
spring, not from the number, but from the ignorance, of men.
Monopolies favour the rich, imposts oppress the poor, com
mercial rivalry grinds to the dust the victims of an over
grown system of competition. To such causes as these, ana
not to positive excess of people, at the time being, is the dis
tress, more or less felt over the civilized world, to be attri
buted. Still, it is undeniable that the most perfect system of
* I speak here, as regretting the circumstance, not as censuring the
individual. It is probable, that had Mr. Mill spoken more plainly, his
essay would have been refused admission into the Encyclopasdia.
�OPAL. PHYSIOLOGY.
25
political or social economy in the world could not, of itself,
prevent the ultimate evils of superabundant population. A nd,
it is no less certain, that, in the meantime, the pressure ol a
large family on the labouring man greatly augments his
difficulties, and often deprives him of that leisure which he
might employ in devising means to better his condition, in
stead of leaving public, business in the hands of political
gamblers.
Vice-bringing laws and customs ought to be—must be
changed ; but while the grass is growing, let us prevent the
horse from starving, if we can
Thus (and I am desirous it be distinctly understood) a
solution of the population question is here offered, as an
alleviation of existing evils, not as a cure for them ; as a pal
liative, not as a remedy, for the national disease. Population
might be but a tenth part of what it is, and unjust legislation'
and vicious customs would still give birth, as they now do, to
extravagance and want. It is true, and ought to be remem
bered, that the check I propose, by diminishing the number
of laborers, will render labor more scarce and consequently
of higher value in the market; and in this view, its political
importance is considerable: but it may also be doubted
whether our present overgrown system of commercial compe
tition be not hurrying the laborer towards the lowest rate of
wages, capable of sustaining life, too rapidly to be overtaken,
except in individual cases, even by a prudential check to
population. I do not, then, expect political wonders from my
little work. Economy in living is, like the parental foresight
of which I speak, in itself an excellent thing, and ought
to be recommended to all ; but he who expects, by the one
recommendation or the other, to eradicate the ills of poverty,
expects an effect from inadequate causes.
The root
of the evil lies far deeper than this ; and its remedy must be
of a more radical nature. This is not the place, however,
to enter on such a discussion. The great importance of the
present work I conceive to lie more in its m«raZ and social,
than in its political, bearings. It is addressed to each
individual, rather as the member of a family, than the
citizen of a state.
Enough has been said, probably, in this chapter, to deter
mine the question, whether it is, or is not, desirable, in a
political point of view, that some check to population be
sought and disclosed—some “moral restraint” that shall
not, like vice and misery, be demoralizing, nor, like late
marriages, be ascetic and immacticable.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
CHAPTER V.
THE QUESTION CONSIDERED IN ITS SOCIAL BEARINGS.
This is by far the most important branch of the question.
The evils caused by an absolute overstocking; of the world, if
inevitable, are distant; and an abstract statement of the sub
ject, however unanswerable, does not come home to the
mind with the force of detailed reality.
What would be the probable effect, in social life, if man
kind obtained and exercised a control over the instinct of
reproduction?
My settled conviction is—and I am prepared to defend
it—that the effect would be salutary, moral, civilising; that
it would prevent many crimes and more unhappiness; that
it would lessen intemperance and profligacy ; that it would
polish the manners and improve the moral feelings; that it
would alleviate the burden of the poor, and the cares of the
rich ; that it would most essentially benefit the rising gene
ration, by enabling parents generally more carefully to
educate, and more comfortably to provide for, their offspring.
I proceed to substantiate these positions.
And first, let us look solely to the situation of married
persons. Is it not notorious, that their families often
increase beyond what a regard for the young beings
coming into the world, or the happiness of those who give
them birth, would dictate ? In how many instances does the
hard-working father, and more especially the mother, of a
poor family, remain slaves throughout their lives, tugging at
the oar of incessant labor, toiling to live, and living only
to die; when, if their offspring had been limited to two or
three, they might have enjoyed comfort and comparative
affluence! How often is the health of the mother, giving
birth every year, perchance, to an infant—happy, if it be not
twins '.—and compelled to toil on, even at those times when
nature imperiously calls for some relief from daily drudgery
—how often is the mother’s comfort, health, nay, her life,
thus sacrificed ! Or, when care and toil have weighed down
the spirit, and at last broken the health of the father, how
often is the widow left, unable, with the most virtuous inten
tions, to save her fatherless offspring from becoming de
graded objects of charity, or profligate votaries of vice !
Fathers and mothers! not you who have your nursery and
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
27
your nursery maids, and who ieave your children at home
to frequent the crowded rout, or to glitter in the hot ball■room ; but you, by the labor of whose hands your children
are to live, and who, as you count their rising numbers, sigh
ttotoink how soon sickness or misfortune may lessen those
wages, which are now but just sufficient to afford them
bread—fathers and mothers in humble life ! to you my
argument comes home, with the force of reality. Others may
impugn—may ridicule it. By bitter experience you know
and feel its truth.
It will be said, that the state ought to provide for the effi
cient guardianship and education of all the children of the
land. No one is less inclined to deny the position than I.
But it does not provide for these. And if it did, a periou
must come at last, when even such an act of justice would
be no relief from the evils of over-population.
,
Yet this is not all. Every physician knows, that there are
many women so constituted that they cannot give birth to
healthy—sometimes not to living children. Is it desirable—
is it moral, that such women should become pregnant? Yet
this is continually the case, the warnings of physicians to the
contrary notwithstanding. Others there are, who ought never
to become parents; because, in so doing, they transmit to
their offspring grievous hereditary diseases; perhaps that
worst of diseases, insanity. Yet they will not lead a life
of celibacy. They marry. They become parents, and the
world suffers by it. That a human being qsould give
birth to a child, knowing that he transmits to it hereditary,
disease, is, in my opinion, an immorality. But it is a folly
to expect that we can ever induce all such persons to live the
lives of Shakers. Nor is it necessary. All that duty requires
of them is, to refrain from becoming parents. Who can
estimate the beneficial effect which rational, moral restraint
may thus have on the physical improvement of our race,
throughout future ages ! Were such virtue as this generally
cultivated, how soon might the very seeds of disease die out
among us, instead of bearing, as now, their poison-fruit,
from generation to generation! and how far might human
beings, in succeeding times, surpass their forefathers in
health, in strength and in beauty!
This view of the subject is, to the physiologist, to the phi
losopher, to every friend of human improvement, a most
interesting one, “ So long’’’ to use the words of an eloquent,
tocturer, now in this city, “ as the tainted stream is unhesi*
'* Mr. Graham, whose excellent discourses on temperance have excited!
�28
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
tatingly transmitted through the channel of nature, from
parent to offspring, so long will the text be verified which
‘ visits the sins of the fathers on the children, even to the
third and fourth generations? ” And so long, I would add,
will mankind (wise and successful whenever there is question
of improving the animal races) be blind in perceiving, and
listless in securing, that far nobler object, the physical, and
thereby (in a measure) the mental and moral improvement
of our own.
1 may seem an enthusiast—but so let me seem then,—when
I express my conviction, that there is not greater physical
disparity between the dullest, shaggiest race of dwarf draught
horses, and the fiery-spirited and silken-haired Arabian, than
'between man degenerate as he is, and man perfected as he
might be : and though mental cultivation in this counts for
much, yet organic melioration is an influential—an indis
pensable accsseary.
But, apart from these latter considerations, is it not most
plainly, clearly, incontrovertibly desirable, that parents should
have the power to limit their offspring, whether they choose
*
to exercise it or not? Who can lose by their having this
power? and how many mrr/y gain ! may gain competency for
themselves, and the opportunity carefully to educate and
provide for their children! How many may escape the jar
rings, the quarrels, the disorder, the anxiety, which an over
grown family too often causes in the domestic circle !
It sometimes happens that individual instances come home
to the feelings with greater force than any general reasoning.
I shall, in this place, adduce one which came immediately
under my cognizance.
In June, 1829, I received from an elderly gentleman of
the first respectability, occupying a public situation in one of
the western states, a letter, requesting to know whether I
could afford any information or advice in a case which greatly
interested him, and which regarded a young woman for
whom he had ever experienced the sentiments of a father.
so much interest, and made so many converts, lately, in New York,
Philadelphia, and other cities of the Union.
* It may possibly be argued, that all married persons have this power
already ; seeing that they are no more obliged to become parents than the
unmarried ; they may live as the brethren and sisters among the Shakers
do. But this Shaker remedy is, as every one knows, utterly impi acticable
as a general rule; and it would chill and embitter domestic life, even if
’t were practicable.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
29
In explanation of the circumstances he enclosed me a copy
of a letter which she had just written to him, and which
I here transcribe verbatim. A letter more touching from
its simplicity, or more strikingly illustrative of the unfortunate
situation in which not one, but thousands, in married life,
find themselves placed, I have never read.
“ Dear Sir,
L * * * Kentucky, May 3, 1829.
“ The friendship which has existed between you and my
father, ever since I can remember; the unaffected kindness
you used to express towards me when you resided in our
neighbourhood, during my childhood ; the lively solicitude
you have always seemed to feel for my welfare, and your
benevolent and liberal character, induce meto lay before you,
in a few words, my critical situation, and ask for your kind
advice.
“ It is my lot to be united in wedlock to a young mechanic
of industrious habits, good dispositions, pleasing manners,
and agreeable features, excessively fond of our children and
of me; in short, eminently well qualified to render him
self and family and all around him happy, were it not for the
besetting sin of drunkenness. About once in every three or
four weeks, if he meet, either accidentally, or purposely, with
some of his friends, of whom,either real or pretended, his good
nature and liberality procure him many, he is sure to get in
toxicated, so as to lose his reason ; and, when thus beside
himself, he trades and makes foolish bargains, so much to
his disadvantage, that he has almost reduced himself and
family to beggary, being no longer able to keep a shop of his
own, but obliged to work journey work.
“We have not been married quite four years, and have
already given being to three dear little ones. Under present
circumstances what can I expect will be their fate and mine?
I shudder at the prospect before me. With my excellent con
stitution and industry, and the labor of my husband, I feel
able to bring up these three little cherubs in decency, were
I to have no more : but when I seriously consider my situa
tion, I can see no other alternative left for me, than to tear
myself away from the man who, though addicted to occasional
intoxication, would sacrifice his life for my sake; and for
whom, contrary to my father’s will, I successively refused the '
hand and wealth of a lawyer and of a preacher; or continue
to witness his degradation, and bring into existence,in all pro
bability, a numerous family of helpless and destitute children, .
who, on account of poverty, must inevitably be doomed to a life of ignorance, and consequent vice and misery.
�30
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
“ The dreadful sentence pronounced against me by my father
for my disobedience, forbids me applying to him, either for
advice or anything else. Aly husband being somewhat
sceptical, my father attributes Ins intemperance to his infi
delity ; though my brother, as you know, being a member of
the same church with my father, is, nevertheless, though he
does not fool away his property, more of a drunkard than my
husband, and ranks among the faithful. You will therefore
plainly see, that for these and other reasons, 1 stand the more .
in need of your friendly advice; and I do hope, and believe ■■
you will give me such advice and counsel as you would to
your own daughter, had you one in the same predicament that
I am. In so doing, you will add new claims to the gratitude
of your friend,
M. W.”
Need I add one word of comment on such a case as this?
Every one must be touched with the amiable feeling and
good sense that pervade the letter. Every rational being,
surely, must admit, that the power of preventing, without
injury or sacrifice, the increase of a family, under such cir
cumstances, is a public benefit and a private blessing.
Will it be asserted—and I know no other even plausible re
ply to these facts and arguments—will it be asserted, that the
thing is, in itself, immoral or unseemly? I deny it; and I point
to France, in justification of my denial. Where will you find,
on the face of the globe, a more polished, or more civilised
nation than the French, or one more punctiliously alive to any
rudeness, coarseness, or indecorum? You will find none. The
French are scrupulous on these points, to a proverb. Yet,
as every intelligent traveller in France must have remarked,
there is scarcely to be found, among the middle or upper
■classes, (and seldom even among the working classes,) a
large family; seldom more than three or four children. A
French lady of the utmost delicacy and respectability will, in
common conversation, say as simply—(ay, and as innocently,
whatever the self-righteous prude may aver to the contrary)
as she would proffer any common remark about the weather:
“ I have three children ; my husband and I think that is as
many as we can do justice to, and I do not intend to have
any more.”*
I have stated notorious facts, facts which no traveller who
has visited Paris, and been admitted to the domestic life of
* Will our sensitive fine ladies blush at the plain good sense and sim
plicity of such an observation ? Let me tell them, the indelicacy is in
their own minds, not in the words of the French mother.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
31
its inhabitants, will attempt to deny. However heterodox,
then, my view of the subject may be in this country, 1 am
supported in it by the opinion and the practice of one of the
most refined and most socially cultivated nations in the
world.
Will it still be argued, that the practice, if not coarse, is
immoral ? Again I appeal to France. I appeal to the details
of the late glorious revolution—to the innumerable instances
of moderation, of courage, of honesty, of disinterestedness, of
generosity, of magnanimity, displayed on the memorable
“ three days,” and ever since; and I challenge comparison
between the national character of modern France for virtue,
as well as politeness, and that of any other nation under
heaven.
It is evident, then, that, to married persons, the power of
limiting their offspring to their circumstances is most desir
able. It may often promote the harmony, peace, and com
fort of families ; sometimes it may save from bankruptcy and
ruin, and sometimes it may rescue the mother from premature
death. In no case can it, by possibility, be worse than super
fluous. In no case can it be mischievous.
If the moral feelings were carefully cultivated, if we were
taught to consult, in every thing, rather the welfare of those
we love than our own, how strongly would these arguments
be felt! No man ought even to desire that a woman should
become the mother of his children, unless it was her express
wish, and unless he knew it to be for her welfare, that she
should. Her feelings, her interests, should be for him in this
matter an imperative law. She it is who bears the burden,
and therefore with her also should the decision rest. Surely
it may well be a question whether it be desirable, or whether
any man ought to ask, that the whole life of an intellectual,!
cultivated woman, should be spent in bearing a family of/
twelve or fifteen children ; to the ruin, perhaps, of her con
stitution, if not to the overstocking of the world. No man
ought to require or expect it.
Shall I be told, that this is the very romance of morality?
Alas ! that what ought to be a matter of every day practice—
a common-place exercise of the duties and charities of life,
■* —a bounden duty—an instance of domestic courtesy too
universal either to excite remark orto merit commendation—
alas ! that a virtue so humble that its absence ought to be re
proached as a crime, should, to our selfish perceptions, seem
iu.t a fastidious refinement, or a fanciful supererogation !
But I pass from the case of married persons to that of
�32
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
young men and women who have not yet formed a matrirno.nial connexion.
In the present state of the world, when public opinion
stamps with opprobrium every sexual connexion which has
not received the orthodox sanction of an oath, almost all
young persons, on reaching the age of maturity, desire to
marry. The heart must be very cold, or very isolated, that
does not find some object on which to bestow its affections.
Early marriages would be almost universal, did not pruden
tial considerations interfere. The young man thinks, “ I
must not marry yet. I cannot support a family. I must
make money first, and think of a matrimonial settlement
afterwards.”
And so he sets about making money, fully and sincerely
resolved, in a few years, to share it with her whom he now
loves. But passions are strong, and temptations great.
Curiosity, perhaps, introduces him into the company of
those poor creatures whom society first reduces to a depen
dence on the most miserable of mercenary trades, and then
curses for being- what she has made them. There his health
and his moral feelings alike make shipwreck. The affections
he had thought to treasure up for their first object, are chil
led by dissipation and blunted by excess, He scarcely re
tains a passion but avarice. Years pass on—years of profli
gacy and speculation—and his first wish is accomplished;
his fortune is made. Where now are the feelings and re
solves of his youth ?
Like the dew on the mountain,
Like the foam on the river,
Like the bubble on the fountain,
They are gone—and for ever I
He is a man of pleasure—a man of the world. He laughs
at the romance of his youth, and marries a fortune. If
gaudy equipages and gay parties confer happiness, he is
happy. But if these be only the sunshine on the stormy
ocean below, he is a victim to that system of morality, which
forbids a reputable connexion until the period when provi
sion has been made for a large, expected family. Had he
married the first object of his choice, and simply delayed
becoming a father until his prospects seemed to warrant it,
how different might have been his lot? Until men and wo
men are absolved from the fear of becoming parents, except
when they themselves desire it, they will continue to form
�33
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
mercenary and demoralizing connexions, and seek in dissi
pation the happiness they might have found in domestic life.
I know that this, however common, is not a universal case.
Sometimes the heavy responsibilities of a family are incurred,
at all risks; and who shall say how often a life of unremit
ting toil and poverty is the consequence ? Sometimes—if even
rarely—the young mind does hold to its first resolves. The
youth plods through years of cold celibacy and solitary
anxiety : happy, if before the best hours of life are gone and
its warmest feelings withered, he may return to claim the
reward of his forbearance and his industry. But even in
this comparatively happy case, shall we count for nothing the
years of ascetical sacrifice at which after-happiness is pur
chased ? The days of youth are not too many, nor its affec
tions too lasting. We may, indeed, if a great object require
it, sacrifice the one and mortify the other. But is this in
itself, desirable ? Does not wisdom tell us, that such sacri
fice is a dead loss—to the warm-hearted often a grievous one?
Does not wisdom bid us temperately enjoy the spring-time
of life, “ while the evil days come not, nor the years draw
nigh when we shall say, ‘ We have no pleasure in them
Let us say, then, if we will, that the youth who thus sacri
fices the present for the future, chooses wisely between two
evils, profligacy and asceticism. This is true. But let us not
imagine the lesser evil to be a good. It is not good for man
to be aione. It is for no man’s or woman’s happiness or benefit, that they should be condemned to Shakerism. It is a vio
lence done to the feelings, and an injury to the character. A
life of rigid celibacy, though greatly preferable to a life of
dissipation, is yet fraught with many evils. Peevishness,
restlessness, vague longings, and instability of character, are
among the least of these. The ipind is unsettled, and the
judgment warped. Even the very instinct which is thus
mortified, assumes an undue importance, and occupies a por
tion of the thoughts, which does not, of right or nature, belong
to it; and which, during a life of satisfied affection, it would
not obtain.
I speak not now of extreme cases, where solitary vice or
*
* For a vice so unnatural as onanism there could be no tempta*
lion, and therefore no existence, were not men and women unnaturally
and mischievously situated. It first appeared, probably, in monasteries
and convents ; and has been perpetuated by the more or less antisocial and demoralizing relation in which the sexes stand to each
ether,inalmost all countries. In estimating the consequences of the
�34
1
‘
moral physiology.
disease, or even insanity, lias been tbe result of asceftca.
mortification. I speak of every-day cases ; and I am well
convinced, that, (however wise it often is, in the present state
of the world, to select and adhere to this alternative,) yet no
man or woman can live the life of a conscientious Shaker,
without suffering, more or less, physically, mentally, and
morally. This is the more to be regretted, because the very
noblest portion of our species—the good, the pure, the highminded, and the kind-hearted—are the chief victims.
Thus, ^nasmuc’1 as the scruple of incurring heavy respon
sibilities deters from forming moral connexions, and en
courages intemperance and prostitution, the knowledge
which enables man to limit his offspring, would, in the pre
sent state of things, save much unhappiness, and prevent
many crimes. Young persons sincerely attached to each other,
and who might wish to marry, might marry early; merely
resolving not to become parents until prudence permitted it.
The young man, instead of solitary toil or vulgar dissipation,
would enjoy the society and the assistance of her he had
chosen as his companion ; and the best years of life, whose
pleasures never return, would not be squandered in riot
or lost through mortification.
If, in virtue of these recommendations, early marriages
became common, and parents were accustomed to limit the
number of their offspring, they would have the best chance
of forming their children’s characters, watching their pro
gress, even to manhood, and seeing them settled in the
world ; instead of leaving them, while young and inexpe
rienced, as they who become parents at a late age must
expect to do, to the mercy of fortune and the guidance of
strangers.
My readers will remark, that all the arguments I have
hitherto employed, apply strictly to the present order of
things, and the present laws and system of marriage. No
one, therefore, need be a moral heretic on this subject, to
present false situation of society, we must set down to the black account
the wretched, wretched consequences, (terminating not unfrequently in
incurable insanity,) of this vice, the preposterous offspring of modern
civilization. Physicians say that onanism at present prevails, to a
lamentable extent, both in this country and England. If the recorts
*
mendations contained in this little treatise were generally followed, it
would probably disappear in a single generation.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY,
35
admit and approve them. The marriage laws mi ht all re
main for ever as they are ; and yet a moral check to popula
tion would be beneficent and important.
But there are other cases, it will be said, in which the
knowledge of such a check would be mischievous. If young
women, it will be argued, were absolved from the fear of
consequences, they would rarely preserve their chastity.
Unlegalized connexions would be common and seldom de
tected. Seduction would be facilitated. Let us carefully
i examine this argument.
I fully agree with that most amiable of moral heretics,
Shelley, that “ Seduction, which term could have no mean
ing in a rational society, has now a most tremendous one.”
It matters not. how artificial the penalty which society has
chosen to affix to a breach of her capricious decrees. Society
has the power in her own hands; and that moral Shylock,
Public Opinion, enforces the penalty, even though it cost
the life of the victim. The consequences, then, to the poor
sufferer, whose offence is but an error of judgment or a weak
ness of the heart, are the same as if her imprudence were
indeed a crime of the blackest dye. And his conduct who,
for a momentary, selfish gratification, will deliberately entail
a life of wretchedness on one whose chief fault, perhaps, was
her misplaced confidence in a hypocrite, is not one whit
excused by the folly and injustice of the sentence.j- Some
poet says,
“ The man. who lays his hand upon a woman
Save in the way of kindness, is a wretch
Whom ’twere gross flattery to call a coward.”
How, then, shall we regard him who makes it a trade to
win a woman’s gentle affections, betray her generous confi
dence, and then, when the consequences become apparent,
abandon her to dependence, and the scorn of a cold, a selfrighteous and a wicked world; a world which will forgive
* Letter of Percy Bysshe Shelley, of December 5, 1818.
+ Every reflecting mind will distinguish between the unreasoning—
sometimes even generous imprudence of youthful passion, and the calcu
lating selfishness of the matured and heartless libertine. It is a melant^ich®ly truth, that pseudo-civilization produces thousands of seducers by
profession, who, while daily calling the heavens to witness their eternal
affections, have no affection for any thing on earth but their own profli
gate Reives. It is to characters so utterly worthless as these that my
t&scrvations apply.
a
�36
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
any thing but rebellion against its tyranny, and in whose
eyes it seems the greatest of crimes to be unsuspecting and
warm-hearted !
And, let me ask, what is it gives to the arts of seduction
thier sting, and stamps to the world its victim ? Why is it,
that the man goes free and enters society again, almost
courted and applauded ; while the woman is a mark for the
finger of reproach, and a butt for the tongue of scandal ? Is
it not chiefly because she bears about her the mark of what
is called her disgrace ? She becomes a mother ; and society
has something tangible against which to direct its anathe
mas. Mine-tenths, at least, of the misery and ruin which are
caused by seduction, even in the present state of public
opinion, result from cases of pregnancy. Perhaps the unfeel
ing selfishness of him who fears to become a father, adminis
ters some noxious drug to procure abortion ; perhaps—
for even such scenes our courts of justice disclose!—perhaps
the frenzy of the wretched mother takes the life of her in
fant, or seeks in suicide the consummation of her wrongs
and her woes ! Or, if the little being live, the dove in the
falcon’s claws is not more certain of death than we may be,
that society will visit, with its bitterest scoff’s and reproaches,
the bruised spirit of the mother and the unconscious inno
cence of the child.
If, then, we cannot do all, shall we neglect a part? If we
cannot prevent every misery which man’s selfishness and the
world’s cruelty" entail on a sex, which it ought to be our pride
and honor to cherish and defend; let us prevent as many as
we can. If we cannot persuade society to revoke its unmanly
and unchristian * persecution of those who are often the best
and gentlest of its members—let us, at the least, give to wo
man what defence we may, against its violence.
I appeal to any father, trembling for the reputation of his
child, whether, if she were induced to form an unlegalised
connexion, her pregnancy would not be a frightful aggrava
tion? I appeal to him, whether any innocent preventive
which shall save her from a situation that must soon disclose
all to the world, would not be an act of mercy, of charity, of
philanthropy—whether it might not save him from despair,
and her from ruin? The fastidious conformist may frow£
upon the question, but to the father it comes home; and.,
• Jesus said unto her,“ Neither do I condemn thee.”—viii. 11
�moral physiology.
37
whatever his lips may say, his heart will acknowledge the
soundness and the force of the argument it conveys.
*
It may be, that some sticklers for orthodox morality will
still demur to the positions I defend. They will perhaps tell
me, as the Committee of a certain Society in this city lately
did, that the power of preventing conceptions “ holds out
inducements and facilities for the prostitution of their
daughters, their sisters, and their wives.
* What is the actual state of society in Great Britain, and even in thii
republic, that pseudo-civilization, in her superlative delicacy, should so
fastidiously scruple to speak of or to sanction, a simple, moral, effectual
check to population? Are her sons all chaste and temperate, and her
daughters all passionless and pure ? I might disclose, if I would, in this
very city of New York—and in our neighbor city of Philadelphia—
scenes and practices that have come to light from time to time, and that
would furnish no very favorable answer to the question. I might ask,
whether all the houses of assignation in these two cities are frequented
b y the known profligate alone ? or, whether some of the most outwardly
respectable fathers—ay, mothers of families—have not been found in
resorts frequented and supported only by “ good society’'’ like them
selves ?
As regards Great Britain, I might quote the evidence delivered before
a “ Committee of the House of Commons, on Laborers’ Wages,” by
Mr. Henry Drummond, a banker, magistrate, and large land-owner, in
the county of Surry, in which the following question and answer occur
Q. “ What is the practice you allude to of forcing marriages ?” A. “ I
believe nothing is more erroneous than the assertion, that the poor laws
tend to imprudent marriages; I never knew an instance of a girl being
married until she was with child, nor ever knew of a marriage taking
place throagh a calculation for future support.” Mr. Drummond’s
assertions were confirmed by other equally respectable witnesses; and
from what I have myself learnt in conversation with some of the chief
manufacturers of England, I am convinced, that the statement, as regards
the working population in the chief manufacturing districts, is scarcely
exaggerated.
I might go on to state, that the spot on which the Foundling Hospital
in Dublin now stands, formerly went by the name of “ Murderer’s
Lane,” from the number of ch-’’d murders that were perpetrated in the
vicinity.
I might adduce the testimony of respectable witnesses in proof, that,
even among the married, the blighting effects of ergot are not unfrequently incurred; by those very persons, probably, who, in public,
would think fit to be terribly shocked at this little book.
But why multiply proofs? The records of every court of justice, nay,
the tittle tattle of every fashionable drawing room, sufficiently marks the
leal character of this prudish and p'narisaical world.of ours.
t See Letter of the Gommittee of the Typographical Socletv ‘ib Robert
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
38
Truly, but they pay their wives, their sisters, and their
daughters, a poor compliment!
Is, then, this vaunted
chastity a mere thing of circumstance and occasion ? Is
there but the difference of opportunity between it and prosti
tution ? Would their wives, their sisters, and their daugh
ters, if once absolved from the fear of offspring, become
prostitutes—sell their embraces for gold, and descend to a
level with the most degraded? In truth, they slander their
own kindred; they libel their own wives, sisters, and
daughters. If they spoke truth—if fear were indeed the only
safeguard of their relatives’ chastity, little value should I
place on a virtue like that I and small would I esteem his
offence, who should attempt or seduce it.
*
Dale Owen, published in the Commercial Advertiser of the 29th of
September, and copied into the Free Enquirer of the 9th of Oqfepber,
1830.
For a statement of the circumstances connected with that letter, and
which induced me, at this time, to write and publish the present treatise,
see Preface to the New York edition.
* I should like to hear these gentlemen explain, according to what
principle they imagine the chastity of their wives to grow out of a fear of
offspring; so that, if released from such fear, prostitution would follow.
I can readily comprehend that the unmarried may be supposed careful
to avoid that situation to which no legal cause can be assigned ; but a
wife must be especially dull, if she cannot assign, in all cases, a legal
cause ; and a husband must be especially sagacious, if he can tell whe
ther the true cause be assigned or not. This safeguard to married
chastity, therefore, to which the gentlemen of the Typographical Com
mittee seem to look with so implicit a confidence, is a mere broken reed ;
and has been so ever since the days of Bathsheba.
Yet conjugal chastity is that which is especially valued. The incon
stancy of a wife commonly cuts much deeper than the dishonor of a
sister. In that case, then, which the world usually considers of the
highest importance, the fear of offspring imposes no check whatever. It
cannot make one iota of difference whether a married woman be knowing
in physiology or not; except perhaps, indeed, to the husbands advan
tage ; in cases where the wife’s conscience induces her at least to guard
against the possibility of burthening her legal lord with the care and sup
port of children that are not his. Constancy, where it actually exists, is
the offspring of something more efficacious than ignorance. And if in
the wife’s case, men must and do trust to something else, why not in all
other cases, where constraint may be considered desirable ? Shall men
trust in the greater, and fear to trust in the less? Whatever any one
may choose to assert regarding his relatives’ secret inclinations to pro
fligacy, these arguments may convince him, that if he have any safeguard
at present, a perusal of Moral Physiology will not destroy it.
’Tis strange that men, by way of suborning an argument, should be
�M01UL PHYSIOLOGY.
39
That chastity which is worth preserving is not Ihc chastity
that owes its birth to fear and ignorance. If to enlighten a
woman regarding a simple physiological fact will make her
a prostitute, she must be especially predisposed to profli' gacy. But it is a libel on the sex. Few, indeed, there are,
, who would continue so miserable and degrading a calling could they escape from it. For one prostitute that is made
by inclination, ten are made by necessity. Reform the laws
—equalize the comforts of society, and you need withhold no
knowledge from your wives and daughters. It is want, not
knowledge, that leads to prostitution.
For myself, I would withhold from no sister, or daughter,
or wife of mine, any ascertained fact whatever. It should
be to me a duty and a pleasure to communicate to them all
I knew myself: and I should hold it an insult to their under
standings and their hearts to imagine, that their virtue would
diminish as their knowledge increased. Would we but trust
human nature, instead of continually suspecting it, and
guarding it by bolts and bars, and thinking to make it very
chaste by keeping it very ignorant, what a different world
we should have of it! The virtue of ignorance is a sickly
plant, ever exposed to the caterpillar of corruption, liable to
be scorched and blasted even by the free light of heaven ; of
precarious growth ; and even if at last artificially matured, of
little or no real value.
I know that parents often think it right and proper to
withhold from their children, especially from their daughters,
facts the most influential on their future lives, and the know
ledge of which is essential to every man and woman’s well
being. Such a course has ever appeared to me ill-judged
and productive of very injurious effects. A girl is surely no
whit tlie better for believing, until her marriage night, that
■ children are found among the cabbage leaves in the garden
The imagination is excited, the curiosity kept continually on
the stretch ; and that which, if simply explained, would have
been recollected only as any other physiological phenome
non, assumes alf the rank and importance and engrossing
interest of a mystery. Nay, I am well convinced, that mere
Curiosity has often led ignorant young people into situations,
from which a little more confidence and openness on the part
of their parents or guardians, would have effectually secured
| them.
willing thus to vilify their relatives’ character and motives, without first
carefully examining whether any thing was gained to theii cause, after
all, by the ’'i'Pic-uion
�•A
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
In the monkish days of mental darkness, when it was
taught and believed that all the imaginations and all the
thoughts of man are only evil continually, when it was
deemed right and proper to secure the submission of the
mass by withholding from them the knowledge even how to
read and write—in those days, it was all very well to shut up
the physiological page, and tell us, that on the day we read
therein we should surely die. But those times are past. In
this nineteenth century men and women read, think, discuss,
inquire, judge for themselves. If, in these latter days, there
is to be virtue at all, she must be the offspring of knowledge
and of free inquiry, not of ignorance and mystery. We
cannot prevent the spread of any real knowledge, even if we
would ; we ought not, even if we could.
This book will make its way through the whole United
States. Curiosity and the notoriety which has already been
given to the subject, will suffice at first to obtain for it cir
culation. The practical importance of the subject it treats
will do the rest. It needed but some one to start the stone;
its own momentum will suffice to carry it forward.
But, if we could prevent the circulation of truth, why
should we? We are not afraid of it ourselves. No man
thinks his morality will suffer by it. Each feels certain that
bis virtue can stand any degree of knowledge. And is it not
the height of egregious presumption in each to imagine that
his neighbor is so much weaker than himself, and requires a
bandage which he can do without? Most of all, it is pre
sumptuous to suppose, that that knowledge which the man
of the world can bear with impunity, will corrupt the young
and lhe pure-hearted. It is the sullied conscience only that
suggests such fears. Trust youth and innocence. Speak
to them openly. Show them that yot- respect them, by
treating them with confidence; and they will quickly learn
to respect and to govern themselves. Enlist their pride
in your behalf; and you will soon see them make it their
boast and their highest pleasure to merit your confidence.
But watch them, and show your suspicion of them but once,
and you are the jailor, who will keep his prisoners just as
long as bars and bolts shall prevent their escape. The
world was never made for a prison-house; it is too large
and ill-guarded : nor were parents ever intended for gaol
keepers ; their very affections unfit them for the task.
There is no more beautiful sight upon earth, than a family
among whom there are no secrets and no reserves ; where
the young people confide every thing to their elder friends—
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
for such to them arc their parents—and whine the parents
trust every thing to their children; where each thought is
communicated as freely as it arises; and all knowledge
given as simply as it is received. If the world contain a
prototype of That Paradise, where nature is said to have
known no sin or impropriety, it is such a family. And if •'
there be a serpent that can poison the innocence of its in- 5
mates, that serpent is Suspicion,
I ask no greater pleasure than thus to be the guardian and
companion of young beings whose innocence shall speak to
me as unreservedly as it thinks to itself; of young beings
who shall never imagine that there is guilt in their thoughts,
or sin in their confidence ; and to whom, in return, I may
impart every important and useful «fact that is known to
myself. Their virtue should be of that hardy growth, which
all facts tend to nourish and strengthen.
I put it to my readers, whether such a view of human
nature, and such a mode of treating it, be not in accordance
with the noblest feelings of their hearts. I put it to them,
whether they have not felt themselves encouraged, improved,
strengthened in every virtuous resolution, when they were
generously trusted, and whether they have not felt abashed
and degraded when they were suspiciously watched, and
spied after, and kept in ignorance. If they find such feelings
in their own hearts, let them not self-righteously imagine,
that they only can be won by generosity, or that the nature
of their fellow-creatures is different from their own.
There are other considerations connected with this subject,
which farther attest the social advantages of the control I
advocate. Human affections are mutable, and the sincerest
of mortal resolutions may change.
*
Every day furnishes
instances of alienations, and of separattons; sometimes
almost before the honey-moon is well expired. In such
cases of unsuitability, it cannot be considered desirable
that there should be offspring; and the power of refraining
from becoming parents until intimacy had, in a measure,
established the likelihood of permanent harmony of view
and feelings, will be confessed to be advantageous.
The limits which my numerous avocations prescribe to
* Le premier serment que se firent deux etres de chair, se fut au
ied d’un rocher, qui tombait en poussiere; ils attesterent de leur conpance un ciel qui n’est pas un instant le meme: tout passait en eux, et
stutour d’eux ; et ils croyaient leurs coeurs affranchis de vicissitudes. O
afaiise a’, touiours enfans! —Diderot Jacques et son Maitre.
t
�42
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
this little treatise, permit me not to meet every argument in
detail, which ingenuity or prejudice might put forward. If
the world were not actually afraid to think freely or to listen
io the suggestions of common sense, three fourths of what
has already been said would be superfluous for most of
;
*
the arguments employed would occur spontaneously to any
rational being. But the mass of mankind have still, in a
measure, every thing to learn on this and other moral sub
jects. The world seems to me much to resemble a company
of gourmands, who sit down to a plentiful repast, first very
punctiliously saying grace over it; and then, under sanction
of the priest’s blessing, think to gorge themselves with im
punity ; as conceiving, that gluttony after grace is no sin.
So it is with popular customs and popular morality. Every
thing is permitted, if external forms be but respected. Le
gal roguery is no crime, and ceremony-sanctioned excess no
profligacy. The substance is sacrificed to the form, the
virtue to the outward observance. The world troubles its
head little about whether a man be honest or dishonest, so
he knows how to avoid the penitentiary and escape the
gallows. In like manner, the world seldom thinks it worth
while to enquire whether a man be temperate or intemperate,
prudent or thoughtless. It takes especial care to inform
itself whether in all things he conforms to orthodox require
ments ; and, if he does, all is right. Thus men too often
learn to consider an oath an absolution from all subsequent
decencies and duties, and a full release from all after re
sponsibilities. If a husband maltreat his wife,, the offence is
venal: for he premised it by making her, at the altar, an
honest vfoman.” If a married father neglect his children,,
it is a trifle ; for grace was regularly said, before they were
born.
So true is this, that if some heterodox moralist were to
throw out the idea, that many of the rudenesses and jarrings,
and much of the indifference and carelessness of each others’
feelings that are exhibited in married life, might be traced to
the almost universal custom (in this country, though not in
France) of man and wife continually occupying the same
bed—if he put it to us whether such a forced and too fre
quent familiarity were not calculated to lessen the charms
and pleasures, and diminish the respectful regard and defer
ence, which ought ever to characterize the intercourse or
□uman beings—if, I say, some heretical preferrer of things
Jo forms were to light upon and express some such unlucky
�43
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
ideaas this, ten to one the married portion of the community
would fall upon him without mercy, as an impertinent inter
meddler in their most legitimate rights and prerogatives.
With such a world as this, it is a difficult matter to reason.
After listening to all I have said, it may perhaps cut me
short by reminding me, that nature herself declares it to be
right and proper, that we should reproduce our species with
out calculation or restraint. I will ask, in reply, whether
nature also declares it to be right and proper, that when the
thermometer is at 96, we should drink greedily of cold
water, and drop down dead in the streets ? Let the world
be told, that if nature gave us our passions and propensities,
she gave us also the power wisely to control them; and that,
when we hesitate to exercise that power, we descend to a
level with the brute creation, and become the sport of for
tune—the mere slaves of circumstance.
*
To one other argument it were not, perhaps, worth while
to advert, but that it has been already speciously used to
excite popular prejudice. It has been said, that to recom
mend to mankind prudential restraint in cases where chil
dren cannot be provided for, is an insult to the poor man;
since all ought to be so circumstanced that they might pro
vide amply for the largest family. Most assuredly all ought
to be so circumstanced ; but all are not. And there would
be just as much propriety in bidding a poor man go and take
by force a piece of Saxony broadcloth from his neighbor’s
store, because he ought to be able to purchase it, as to en
courage him to go on producing children, because he ought
to have wherewithal to support them. Let us exert every
nerve to correct the injustice and arrest the misery that results
from a vicious order of things; but, until we have done so,
let us not, for humanity’s sake, madly recommend that which
grievously aggravates the evil; which increases the burden
on the present generation, and threatens with neglect and
Ignorance the next.
* Some German poet, whose name has escaped me, says,
“ Tapfer ist der Lowensieger,
Tapfer ist der Weltbezwinger,
.
Tapferer, wer sich selbst bezwang!”
u
<f Brave is the lion victor,
Brave the conqueror of a world,
Braver he who controls himself!”
It ia a noble sentiment, and very appropriate to the present discussion-
�44
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
And now, let my readers pause. Let them review the va
rious arguments I have placed before them. Let them reflect
how intimately the instinct of which I treat is connected
with the social welfare of society. Let them bear in mind,
that just in proportion to its social influence, is it important
that we should know how to control and govern it; that,
when we oblain such control, we may save ourselves, and
what we ought to prize much more highly, may save our com
panions and our offspring, from suffering or misery ; that, by
such knowledge, the young may form virtuous connexions,
instead of becoming profligate or ascetics; that, by it, early
marriage is deprived of its heaviest, consequences, and seduc
tion of its sharpest sting; that, by it, man may be saved from
moral ruin, and woman from desolating dishonor: that by it
the first pure affections may be soothed and satisfied, instead
of being thwarted or destroyed—let them call to mind all
this, and then let them say, whether the possession of such
control be not a blessing to man.
,______ _
•
,, ffniUitiia. ot buoni
-id joun«o rroib
<■', H-. rmi-:
CHAPTER VI.
/
THE SUBJECT CONSIDERED IN ITS IMMEDIATE CONNECTION
WITH PHYSIOLOGY.
It now remains, after having spoken of the desirability of
obtaining control over the instinct of reproduction, to speak
of its practicability.
As, in this world, the value of labor is too often estimated
almost in proportion to its inutility; so, in physical science,
contested questions seem to have attracted attention and en
gaged research, almost in the inverse ratio of their practical
importance. We have a hundred learned hypotheses for one
decisive practical experiment. We have many thousands of
volumes written to explain fanciful theories, and scarcely as
many dozens to record ascertained facts.
It is not my intention, in discussing this branch of the sub
ject, to examine the hundred ingenious theories of genera
tion which ancient and modern physiologists have put forth.
I shall not inquire whether the future human being owes its
first existence, as Hippocrates and Galen assert, and Buffon
very ingeniously supports, to the union of two life-giving
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
45
fluids, each a sort of extract of the body of the parent, and!
composed of organic particles similar to the future offspring;
or whether, as Harvey and Haller teach, the embryo reposea
in the ovum until vivified by the seminal fluid, or perhaps
only by the aura seminalis: or whether, according to the
theories of Leuvenhoeck and Boerhaave, the future man
first exists as a spermatic animalcula, for which the ovum,
becomes merely the nourishing receptacle, or whether,, as
the ingenious Andry imagines, a vivifying worm be the more
correct hypothesis; or whether, finally, as Perault will
have it, the embryo beings (too wondex fully organized’
*
to be supposed the production of any mere physical phe
nomenon) must be imagined to come directly from the hands
of the Creator, who has filled the universe with these
little germs, too minute, indeed, to exercise all the ani
mal functions, but still self-existent, and awaiting only
the insinuation of some subtle essence into their microscopic
pores, to come forth as human beings. Still less am I
inclined to follow Hippocrates and Tertullian in their
inquiries, whether the soul is merely introduced into the
foetus, or pre-exists in the semen, and becomes, as it were,
the architect of its future residence, the body; f or to attempt
a refutation of the hypothesis of the metaphysical naturalist, J
who asserts, (and adduces the infinite indivisibility of matter
in support of the assertion,) that the actual germs of the
whole human race, and of all that are yet to be born, existed
in the ovaria of our first mother, Eve. I leave these and fifty
other hypotheses, as ingenious and as useless, to be discussed
by those who seem to make it a point of honor to leave no
fact unexplained by some imagined theory ; and come at
once to positive experience and actual observation.
It is exceedingly to be regretted that mankind did not
spend some small portion of the time and industry which,
has been wasted on theoretical research, in collecting and
collating the actual experience of human beings. But this
task, too difficult for the ignorant, has generally been
thought too simple and common-place for the learned. To
* See “ Histoire de l’Academie des Sciences,” for the year 1679,
page 279.
t Hippocrates positively asserts this latter hypothesis, and is outrage
ous against all sceptics in his theory. In his work on diet, he tells us,
“ Si quis non credat animam, anima misceri, demens est” TertulliaO
tvarmly supports the orthodoxy of this opinion.
| Bonner, I believe.
�46
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
this circumstance, joined to the fact, that it is not thought
fitting or decent for human beings freely to communicate
their personal experience on the important subject now
under consideration—to these causes are attributable the
great and otherwise unaccountable ignorance which so
strangely prevails, even sometimes among medical men, as
to the power which man may possess over the reproductive
instinct. Some physicians deny that man possesses any such
power. And yet, if the thousandth part of the talent and
research had been employed to investigate this momentous
fact, which has been turned to the building up of idle
theories, no commonly intelligent individual would be igno
rant of the truth.
I have taken great pains to ascertain the opinions of the
most enlightened physicians of Great Britain and France on
this subject; (opinions which popular prejudice will not per
mit them to offer publicly in their works ;) and they all con
cur in admitting, what the experience of the French nation
positively proves, that man may have a complete control over
this instinct; and that men and women may, without injury
to health, or violence to the moral feelings, and with very
little diminution of the pleasure which accompanies the grati
fication of the instinct, refrain at will from becoming parents.
It has chanced to me, also, to gain the confidence of several
individuals, who have communicated to me, without reserve,
their own experience ; and all this has been corroborative of
the same opinion.
Thus, though I pretend not to speak positively to the de
tails of a subject, which will then only be fully understood
when men acquire sense enough simply and unreservedly
to discuss it, I may venture to assure my readers, that the
main fact is incontrovertible. I shall adduce such facts in
proof of this as may occur to me in the course of the inves
tigation.
However various and contradictory the different theories
of generation, almost all physiologists are agreed, that the
entrance of the sperm itself (or of some volatile particles
proceeding from it) into the uterus, must precede conception. This it was that probably first suggested the possibi
lity of preventing conception at will.
Among the modes of preventing conception which may
have prevailed in various countries, that which has been
adopted, and is now practised, by the cultivated classes on
the continent of Europe, by the French the Italians and I
!
*
■
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
47
Relieve, by the Germans and Spaniards, consists of complete
Withdrawal, on the part of the man, immediately previous to
emission. This is, in all cases, effectual. It may be objected,
that the practice requires a mental effort and a partial sacri
fice. I reply, that, in France, where men consider this, (as
it ought ever to be considered, when the interests of the other
sex require it,) a point of honor—ally oung men learn to make
the necessary effort; and custom renders it easy and a matter
J of course. As for the sacrifice, shall a trifling (and it is but a
very trifling) diminution of physical enjoyment be suflered
to outweigh the most important considerations connected
with the permanent welfare of those who are the nearest and
dearest to us? Shall it be suffered to outweigh the risk of
incurring heavy and sacred responsibilities, ere we are pre
pared to fulfil them ? Shall it be suffered to outweigh a regard
for the comfort, the well-being—in some cases, the life, of
those whom we profess to love? The most selfish will hesitate
deliberately to reply, in the affirmative, to such questions as
these. A cultivated young Frenchman, instructed as he is,
even from his infancy, carefully to consult, on all occasions,
the wishes, and punctiliously to care for the comfort and wel
fare, of the gentler sex, would learn, almost with incredulity,
that, in other countries, there are men to be found, pretend
ing to cultivation, who were less scrupulously honorable on
this point than himself. You could not offer him a greater
insult than to presuppose the possibility of his forgetting
himself so far as thus to put his own momentary gratification,
for an instant, in competition with the wish or the well-being
of any one to whom he professed regard or affection.
I know it will be argued, that men in the mass are not
I sufficiently moral to adopt this recommendation; because they
will not make any voluntary sacrifice of animal enjoyment,
however trifling. I do not see that. Hundreds of voluntary
* A Frenchman belonging to the cultivated classes, would as soon bear
to be called a coward, as to be accused of causing the pregnancy of a
woman who did not desire it ■, and that, too, whether the matrimonial
’ law had given him legal rights over her person or not. Such an imputa
tion, if substantiated, would shut him out for ever from all decent society ;
and most properly so. It is a perfect barbarity, and ought to be treated
as such.
When we begin to look to genuine morality, instead of empty or onenk fcve forms, these are the principle, of honor we shall implant in our chil
dren’s minds : and then we shall have a world of courtesy and kindneSF^
instead of a scene of legal outrage, or hypocritical profession.
�48
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
sacrifices are daily made to fashion—to public opiniou. Let
but public opinion bear on this point in other countries, as it
does among the more enlightened classes in France, and
similar effects will be produced.
The matter is a trifle. The mere act of animal satisfaction,
counts with any man of commonly cultivated feelings, as but
a small item in the aggregate of enjoyment which satisfied
affection aifords; and, surely, whether that act be at ali
times attended with the utmost degrees of physica pleasure
or not, must, even with the felfish, be a secondary and unim
portant consideration. His moral sentiments must be espe
cially weak or uncultivated, who will not admit, that it is the
gratification of the social feelings—the repose of the affec
tions—which, at all times, constitutes the chief charm of
human intercourse.
The least injurious among the present checks to popula
tion, celibacy, is a mortification of the affections, a violence
done to the social feelings, sometimes a sacrifice even of the
health. Not one of these objections can be urged to the
trifling restraint proposed.
As to the cry which prejudice may raise against it as being
unnatural, it is just as unnatural, and no more so, than to
refrain, in a sultry summer’s day, from drinking, perhaps,
more than a pint of water at a draught, which prudence tells
us is enough, while inclination bids us drink a quart. All
thwarting of any human wish or impulse may, in one sense,
be called unnatural; it is not, however, oft-time the less pru
dent and proper, on that account. Then, too, if this trifling re
straint is to be called unnatural, what shall we say of celibacy ?
As to the practical efficacy of this simple preventive, the
experience of France, where it is extensively practised,
might suffice in proof. I know, at this moment, several
married persons who have told me, that, after having had
as many children as they thought prudent, they hail for years
employed this check, with perfect success. For the satisfaction
of my readers, I will select one particular instance.
I knew personally and intimately for many years, a young ,
man of strict honour, in whose sincerity I ever placed confi- 1
dence, and who confided to me the particulars of his situation. ■,
He was just entering on life, with slender means, and his I
circumstances forbade him to have a large family of chil
dren. He, therefore, having consulted his young wife, prac
tised this restraint, I believe for about eighteen months, and
with perfect success. At the expiration of that period, theij
situation being more favourable, they resolved to become
�MOKAL PHYSioluGY.
4.9
parents; and, in a fortnight after, the wife found herself
pregnant. My friend told me, that though he felt the partial
privation a little at first, a few weeks’ habit perfectly re
conciled him to it; and that nothing but a deliberate con
viction that he might prudently now become a parent,
and a strong desire on his wife’s part to have a child, in
duced him to alter his first practice. I believe I was the
only one among his friends to whom he ever communicated
the real state of the case; and I doubt not there are, even
in this cotf-^try, hundreds of similar cases which the world
never learns any thing about. Hence the doubts and igno
rance which exist on the subject.
I add another instance. A short time since, a respectable
and very intelligent father of a family, about thirty-five
years of a<re, who resides west of the mountains, called at
our office. Conversation turned on the present subject, and
I expressed to him my conviction, that this check was effec
tual. He told me he could speak from personal experience.
He had married young, and soon had three children. These
he could support in comfort, without running into debt or
*
difficulty; but, the price of produce sinking in his neigh
bourhood, there did not appear a fair prospect of supporting a
large family. In _ .'sequence, he and his wife determined to
limit their offspring to three. They havo accordingly em
ployed the above check for seven or eight years; have had
no more children; and have been rewarded for their pru
dence by finding their situation and prospects improving
every year. He confirmed an opinion I have already ex
pressed, by stating, that custom completely reconciled him
to anv slig1,i privation he might at first have felt. I asked
him, whether his neighbors generally followed the same
practice. H" replied, that he could not tell; for he had not
thought it prudent to speak with any but his own relations on
the subject, one or two of whom, he knew, had profited by his
advice, and afterwards expressed to him their gratitude for
the important information.
It is unnecessary farther to multiply instances. The fact
that this check is in common practice, and known to be effi
cacious, in France, is alone sufficient evidence of its practi
cability and safety.
I can readily imagine, that there are men, wSo, in parr
from temperament, but much more from the continued habit
of unrestrained indulgence, may have so little command
over their passions, as to find difficulty in practising it; and
some, it may be, who will declare it to be impossible. If any
D
�50
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
there be to whom itzs impossible, (which I very much doubt,
I am at least convinced that the number is exceedingly small;
not a fiftieth part of those who may at first imagine such to be
their case.
I may add, that partial withdrawal is not an infallible pre
ventive of conception.
Other modes of prevention have been employed. I have
selected this, because I judge it to be at once the most simple,
and the most efficacious. Those who have employed it for
ys»ars, seem to concur in the opinion that it. is, as regards its
influence on health, innocent: it has even been said to
*
produce on the human system an influence similar to that of
temperance in diet; but this I doubt. As regards any moral
impropriety in its use, enough methinks has already been said,
to convince all except those who will not be convinced, that
to employ it, in all cases where prudence or the well-being
of our companions requires it, is an act of practical virtue.
It may be said, and said truly, that this check places the
power chiefly in the hands of the man, and not, where it
ought to be, in those of the woman. She, who is the sufferer,
is not secured against the culpable carelessness, or perhaps
the deliberate selfishness, of him who goes free and unblamed
whatever may happen. To this, the reply is, that the best and
only effectual defence for women is to refuse connexion with
any man void of honor. An (almost omnipotent) public opinion
would thus be speedily formed: one of immense moral utility,
by means of which the man’s social reputation would be
placed, as it should be, in the keeping of women, whose
moral tact and nice discrimination in such matters is far
superior to ours. How mighty and beneficent the power
which such an influence might exert, and how essentially and
rapidly it might conduce to the gradual, but thorough extir* Experience, extensive and carefully recorded, can alone verify, as
in a matter so important ought to be verified, the opinion here expressed
touching the innocence to health of the preventive recommended. No
one is justified in speaking positively on such a subject, until he has
accumulated a greater mass of facts than I, or perhaps any other indi
vidual, have yet had the means of ascertaining. The subject once
agitated, such facts will gradually come to light. <n the mean time let
us bear in mind, that the truth and importance of th abstract principle
*
rest not on the accuracy of the physiological items here adduced. A
preventive check to population is a thing in itself good and desirable, or
it is the reverse. If good and desirable, men and women will ultimately
perceive it to be so, and will search and experiment until they discover
what practice is best. Of this, as of other branches of physical science,
time alone can elucidate and substantiate the details.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
51
pation of those selfish vices, legal and illegal, which now dis
grace and brutify our species, it is difficult even to imagine.
In the silent, but resistless progress of human im
provement, such a change is fortunately inevitable. We
are gradually emerging from the night of blind prejudice and
of brute force; and, day by day, rational liberty and cultivated
refinement, win an accession of power. Violence yields to
benevolence, compulsion to kindness, the letter of law to the
spirit of justice : and, day by day, men and women become
more willing, and better prepared, to entrust the most sacred
duties (social as well as political) more to good feeling and
less to idle form—more to moral and less to legal keeping.
It is no question whether such reform will come: no
human power can arrest its progress. How slowly or how
rapidly it may come, is a question ; and depends, in some
degree, on adventitious circumstances. Should this little
book prove one among the number of circumstances to ac
celerate, however slightly, that progress, its author will be
repaid, ten times over, for the trifling labor it has cost
him.
In conclusion, it may be useful to state to the reader the
following facts. A knowledge of this and other checks to
population has been, for many years, extensively disseminated
in most of the populous towns in Great Britain by hundreds
of thousands ofhand-bills which were gratuitously distributed
from benevolent motives. The men who were first instru mental
in making them known in England are all elderly men,fathers
of families of children grown up to be men and women ; men
of unquestioned integrity and moral character; many of them
men of science, and some of them known as the first political
economists of the age. Beside the allusion to thesubjectalready
given from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, it is adverted to in
Place’s “ Illustrations of the principles of Population;” in Mill’s
“ Elements of Political Economy in Thompson’s “ Distri
bution of Wealth,” and probably in other works with which
I am unacquainted. It was also (disguisedly) broach ed in
several English newspapers, and was preached in lectur es to
the laboring classes, by a benevolent man, at Leeds. I do
not believe the subject has ever been touched upon, ex
cept by men of irreproachable moral character, and gene
rally of high standing in society. The chief difference
between this little treatise, and the allusions made by the
distinguished authors above mentioned, is, that what public
opinion would only permit them to insinuate, I venture to say
plainly.
~
D 2
�52
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
My readers may implicitly depend on the accuracy of the
facts I have stated. Though, in the present state of public
opinion, I may not, for obvious reasons, give names in proof,
yet it is evident that I can have no motive whatever to mislead
or deceive. I shall consider it a favor if any individuals who
can adduce, from personal experience, facts connected with
this subject, will communicate them to me.
Note. The enlightened Condorcet, in his well-known “ Esquisse des
progres de I’esprit humain,” -very distinctly alludes to the safety and
facility with which population might be restrained, “ if reason should
but keep pace with the arts and sciences, and if the idle prejudices of
superstition should cease to shed over human morals an austerity cor
rupting and degrading, not purifying or elevating.” See his Esquisse,
pages 285 to 288, Paris Ed. 1822. Malthus (see his “ Essays on Popu
lation,’' Book III. chap. 1.) “professes not to understand the French
philosopher.” No Frenchman could misunderstand him.
CHAPTER VII.
CONCLUDING REMARKS.
That most practical of philosophers, Franklin, interprets
chastity to mean, the regulated and strictly temperate satisfac
tion, without injury to others, of those desires which are natural
to all healthy adult beings. In this sense chastity is the first
of virtues, and one most rarely practised, either by young
*
men or by married persons, even when the latter most scru
pulously conform to the letter of the law.
*
The promotion of such chastity is the chief object of tne
present work. It is all-important for the welfare of our
race, that the reproductive instinct should never be selfishly
indulged ; never gratified at the expense of the well-being of
our companions. A man who, in this matter, will not con
sult, with scrupulous deference, the slightest wishes of the
other sex ; a man who will ever put his desires in competi
tion with theirs, and who will prize more highly the pleasure
lie receives than that he may be capable of bestowing—such
a man, appears to me, in the essentials of character, a brute.
* My father, Robert Owen’s definition of chastity is also an excellent
and an important one: “PROSTITUTION, Sexual intercourse without
affection: CHASTITY, Sexual intercourse with affection.”
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
53
The brutes commonly seek the satisfaction of their propen
sities with straight-forward selfishness, and never calculate
whether their companions are gratified or teased by their im
portunities. Man cannot assimilate his nature more closely
to theirs than by imitating them in this.
Again. There is no instinct in regard to which strict tem
perance is more essential. All our animal desires have
hitherto occupied an undue share of human thoughts; but
none more generally than this. The imaginations of the young
and the passions of the adult are inflamed by mystery or
excited by restraint, and a full half of all the thoughts and
intrigues of the world has a direct reference to this single
instinct. Even those who, like the Shakers, “ crucify the
flesh,” are not the less occupied by it in their secret thoughts;
as the Shaker writings themselves may afford proof. Neither
human institutions nor human prejudices can destroy the
instinct. Strange it is, that men should not be content ration
ally to control and wisely to regulate it.
It is a question of passing importance, IIow may it Dest
he regulated?” Not by a Shaker vow of monkish chastity.
Assuredly not by the world’s favorite regulator, ignorance.
No. Do we wish to bring this instinct under easy govern
ment, and to assign it only its due rank among human senti
ments ? Then let us cultivate the intellect, let us exercise
the body, let us usefully occupy the time, of every human
being. What is it gives to passion its sway, and to desires
their empire, now ? It is vacancy of mind; it is listlessness
of body ; it is idleness. A cultivated race are never sensual;
a hardy race are seldom love-sick ; an industrious race have
no time to be sentimental. Develope the moral sentiments,
and they will govern the physical instincts. Occupy the
mind and body usefully, intellectually ; and the propensities
will obtain that care and time only which they merit. Upon
any other principle we may doctor poor human nature for
ever, and shall only prove ourselves empirics in the end.
Mortifications, vestal vows, mysteries, bolts and bars, prud
ish prejudices—these are all quack-medicines; and are only
calculated to prostrate lhe strength and spirits, or to heighten
the fever, of the patient. If we will dislodge error and pas
sion, we must replace them by something better. They say
that a vacuum cannot exist in nature. Least of all can it exist
in the human mind. Empty it of one folly, cure it of one
vice, and another flows in to fill the vacancy, unless it find it
already occupied by intellectual exorcise and common sense
�54
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
Husbands and fathers! study Franklin’s definition of chas
tity. Your fears, your jealousies, have hitherto been on the
stretch to watch and guard: reflect whether it be not pleasan
ter and better, to enlighten and trust.
Honest ascetics ! you have striven to mortify the flesh;
ask yourselves whether it be not wiser to control it. You have
sought to crucify the body ; consider whether it be not more
effectual to cultivate the mind.
Have you succeeded mi
spiritualizing your secret thoughts? If not, inquire whether
every human propensity, duly governed, be not a benefit and
a blessing to the nature in which it is inherent.
Human beings, of whatever sex or class I examine dispas
sionately and narrowly the influence which the control here
recommended will produce throughout society. Reflect
whether it will not lighten the burdens of one sex, while it
affords scope for the exercise of the best feelings of the other.
Decide whether its tendency be not benignant and elevating;
conducive to the exercise of practical virtue, and to the per
manent welfare of the human race.
�APPENDIX
TO THE FIFTH EDITION.
Reception of the Work by the Public. Opinion of a talented Author. Opinion
of a Physician and Professor. Letter from a Mechanic. The work never in
tended as a political panacea. Transmission of hereditary disease. Letter on
the subject. Letter from a French gentleman. Physiological argument in fa
vor of temperance. Experience of two members of the Society of Fri ends
Objection of J. W. Objections by a physician of Indiana. Answer to them
Weighty objections. Suggestion in a letter from Manchester.
New-York, June 25, 1831
Seven months have not yet elapsed since the first publication of
“ Moral Physiology
and already I am called upon to pre
pare a fifth edition. If I am pleased (as what author is not) to
see that my labors are appreciated by the public, I am also
reminded of the additional obligations I lie under, to render the
little treatise as complete and as free from error and inaccuracy
as possible.
I have therefore carefully revised the work, and made such
amendments as have suggested themselves during these seven
months. And as, in the course of that time, I have received a mul
titude of communications (some verbal.but chiefly by letter) on ths
subject in question, I shall here add, in the shape of Appendix,
such extracts from, and comments on, a few of these, as seem
<.0 me interesting and useful.
I expected much opprobrium from the work ; and have been
not a , little surprised to find my expectations agreeably dis
�APPENDIX.
56
appointed. Never, in my life, have I written any thing that so
nearly united the suffrages of all whose opinion I care for, or
which has been suffered to spread more quietly by our opponents.
Jn this, these latter have acted wisely. Had they abused it, it
might have been the Appendix to the twentieth, not to the fifth,
edition I should now be writing.
The sentiments of approval which have reached me from vari
ous quarters, have, in the expressive language of the Old Book,
“ strengthened my hands and encouraged my heart;” for,
though the world’s opinion be worth little, there are individualsin
it whose opinion is worth much; and though a consciousness of
rectitude may support a man against all opinions, yet it is plea
sant to find, now and then, in one’s progress, concurrent senti
ments from those we esteem.
I imagine that it may afford similar encouragement, in a de
gree, to any of my readers who may chance to approve what they
read, if I quote for them a few of these opinions. I begin by se
lecting for the purpose two, which come from men both known to
me, as to the American public, only by their writings. Could I
give the names of the writers, these w ould be sufficient to secure
for their opinions a weight which no anonymous sentiments can
obtain. But, in the present state of public opinion, I do not feel
myself at liberty to do so. My readers must therefore be content
to take my word for it, that both the writers are gentlemen who
nave displayed in their works talents of a high order, and whose
personal acquaintance I should highly value.
I extract from the first letter the following:
“ I am greatly obliged to you for sending me your ‘ Moral Phy
siology.’ I have read it with pleasure and instruction. I see not
why you should anticipate censure, from any quarter, for its pub
lication. It contains no sentiment or doctrine which strikes me
unfavorably, or which any person could wish suppressed. Had
the same thoughts occurred to me, I should have entertained
them, and possibly published them, without the least suspicion of
offence to delicacy or good morals.
“ I fully concur with you, that truth can do the world no harm.
Nor do I doubt that he would be deemed a benefactor, (even an
exceedingly great benefactor,) who can teach man how to limit
his powers of reproduction without abridging his enjoyments.”
Again, the same correspondent says :
“ The value of the pow'er to limit offspring is, I think, very se
parable from any theory which involves consequences arising from
�APPENDIX.
67
the extent of population which the earth can sustain. The liini.
tation is a matter which concerns the present comfort of indivu
duals, in their private capacity; while the extent of the earth’
ultimate fecundity concerns only the thoughts of speculatists and
politicians. I say this, because I am not troubled by the spectre
of Malthus.”
This appears to me an enlightened, and also a very practical
view of the subject. The political economy of the question ought
ever to be kept separate from its moral bearings. The conse
quences involved by the former, are distant, and may be called
theoretical; while those resulting from the latter, are immediate,
and of daily recurrence in practice. If there were no tendency
whatever in the human race to increase beyond its present num
bers, the question would still be one of vital interest, and the con
sequences it involves would still be of surpassing importance to
man in his social and domestic relations. The more I reflect on
the subject, the more thoroughly convinced I am, that man can
never attain to any thing like social cultivation, without a know
ledge of the means to limit, at pleasure and without much sacri
fice of enjoyment, his power of reproduction. And I cannot but
think, that all who have seen much of the civilised world, and
carefully traced out the various causes of the vices and miseries
that pervade it, will, upon reflection, concur with me in the
opinion.
The second writer of whom I spoke (an eminent physician and
professor) says:
“ I have received your ‘ Moral Physiology.’ Your boldness
and independence are entitled to great respect. It is a very im
portant question, and ought to be brought forward, that the pub
lic opinion concerning it may be based on the only proper ground,
full and free and patient public discussion. Your method of hand
ling the subject I approve. Place, the political economist, sug
gests the remedy more boldly than any other.”
The next communication from which I shall copy is from a
young man of excellent character, living in a neighbouring state,
and now one of the conductors of a popular periodical. After sug
gesting to me the propriety of re-publishing some English works
now out of print, he proceeds as follows :
“-------- , February 23, 1831.
Had I not been addressing you upon another subject, I should
nnt have ventured to obtrude on you my small meed of approba
tion, due to your last work ; but I cannot let slip this opportunity
�58
APPENDIX.
of endeavouring to express how much I feel indebted to you for
its publication.
“ To know how I am so indebted, it is necessary you should
also know something of my situation in life : and when it is de
scribed, it is perhaps a description of the situation of two-thirds of
the journeymen mechanics of this country.
“ I have been married nearly three years, and am the father of
two children. Having nothing to depend upon but my own in
dustry, you will readily acknowledge that I had reason to look
forward with at least some degree of disquietude to the prospect
of an increasing family and reduced wages: apparently the inevi
table lot of the generality of working men. Under these circum
stances, I saw W. Jackson’s article in the Delaware Free Press •
but my feelings as a freeman (nominally) revolted at it, and I
must say that I felt greatly pleased when I found that his’ system
did not meet your approbation. You had spoken upon the sub
ject, but, like the Nazarene Reformer, you spoke in parables.
‘ Every Woman’s Book’ I could not see ; and, had not Dr. Gibbons afforded me an example of how much you might be misre
presented, I might have been tempted to believe the slanders cir
culated regarding you.
“ I had apparently nothing left but to let matters take their
own course, when your ‘ Moral Physiology’ made its appearance.
“ I read it; and a new scene of existence seemed to open be
fore me. I found myself, in this all-important matter, a free
agent, and, in a degree, the arbiter of my own destiny. I could
have said to you, as Selim said to Hassan,
‘ Thou’st hewed a mountain’s weight from off my heart.
*
My visions of poverty and future distress vanished ; the present
seemed gilded with new charms, and the future appeared no
longer to be dreaded. But you can better imagine, than I can
describe, the revolution of my feelings.
“ I have since endeavoured to circulate the little book as
widely as my limited opportunities permit, and shall continue to
do so, believing it to be the most useful work that has made its
appearance since the publication of Paine’s ‘ Common Sense
and convinced that, by so doing, I shall render you the most
acceptable return, in my power to make, for the benefit you have
conferred upon me as an individual
G.”
The next extract, from an inhabitant of Pennsylvania, I have
selected chiefly as it furnishes a beautiful, and, alas ! a rare, ex
�APPENDIX.
59
ample, of that parental conscientiousness which scruples to inipar‘
existence, where it cannot also impart the conditions necessary
to render that existence happy
“----------- , March 23, 1831.
*
% “ I use no meat, unless eggs may be considered such; I drink
neither tea, coffee, nor any thing more exciting than milk and
water; and, like yourself, I am fully satisfied, having no craving
after the luxuries of the table. With regard to ‘ Moral Physio
*
logy, let the following facts speak :
** I was born of poor parents, and early left an orphan.
When of age, though my circumstances promised poorly for
the support of a family, I desired to marry, knowing that a
good wife would greatly add to my happiness. The check spoken
of in your book (withdrawal) presented itself to my mind. And
for seven years that I have now been married, lhave continued to
practise it. I was successful in business, and acquired the means
of maintaining a family; but still I have refrained, because my
constitution is such an one as I think a parent ought not to transmit
to his offspring. I prefer refraining from giving birth to sentient
beings, unless I can give them those advantages, physical as well
as moral and intellectual, which are essential to human happiness.
“ One thing I have observed, that since I have adopted a simple
diet, and laid by all artificial stimuli, not only is my health better
and my mind more clear, but I can abstain, at will, without in
jury or inconvenience, from sexual connexion for any length of
time;’ and this without having, in the least, lost any power in
that respect.
T.”
* We applaud as a marvel, the continence of Scipio. Such continence—and
amid circumstances far more trying—is habitually found (under no other re
straint than that of public opinion) among the native Indians of our continentA friend of mine, whose family was captured by a party of Mohawk Indians some
fifty years ago, informed me, that four young women (two of them of considera
ble beauty) who were made prisoners on that occasion, were not once, during a
residence of several years, addressed, even with the remotest degree of sexual im
portunity, by an Indian, old or young, though living with them in the same wig
wam. These young women were the near relatives of the friend who related this
fact to me; and it was from their own lips he obtained it. Yet these were sa
vages.
4 How common would be such 'virtue among ourselves, but for the artificial
Stimuli, and as artificial restraints, which custom and Jaw make prevalent amonv
as.
R. D. O.
�60
APPENDIX.
From the letter of in aged French gentleman, who holds a
public office in the western country, I translate the following •
and I would that every young man and woman in these United
States could read it:
•‘I have read your little work with much interest, and desire
that it may have a wide circulation, and that its recommendations
may be adopted in practice. If you publish a third edition, I
could wish that you would add a piece of advice of the greatest
importance, especially to young married persons. Many women
are ignorant, that, in the gratification of the reproductive instinct
the exhaustion to the man is much greater than to the woman:
a fact most important to be known, the ignorance of which has
caused more than one husband to forfeit his health, nay, his life.
Tissot tells us, that the loss by an ounce of semen is equal to that
by forty ounces of blood ; and that in the case of the healthiest
*
man, nature does not demand connexion oftener than once a
month.!
“ How many young spouses, loving their husbands tenderly
and disinterestedly, if they were but informed of these facts, would
watch over and and preserve their partners’ healths, instead of
exciting them to over-indulgence 1
“ I send you a copy of Italian verses,; appropriate, like the
German stanza you have quoted in your work, to the above re
marks :
(
* Merta gli allori al crine
Chi scende in campo arinato,
• This of course must be rather a matter of conjecture and approximation, than
of accurate calculation.
r. d. O.
F- t And I doubt whether she permits it without more or less injury, to the average
of constitutions, oftener than once a week. I am convinced that atty young man who
will carefully note and compare his sensations, will become convinced, that tem
perance forbids such indulgence, at any rate, more than twice a week; and
that he trifles with his constitution who neglects the prohibition. How immea
surably important that parents should communicate to their sons, but especially
to their daughters, facts like these!
t For the English reader, 1 have attempted the following imitation of the above
lines:
Crown his brows with laurel wreath,
Who can tread the field* of death—
�6h
APPENDIX.
Chi a cento squadre a late,
Impallidir non sa:
Ma pih gloria ha nel fronte
Chi, alia ragion soggetto,
D’un sconsigliato affetto
Trionfator si ft.
I extract the following from my journal:
“ A member of the Society of Friends, from the country, called
at our office; he informed me that he had been married twenty
years, had six children, and would probably have had twice as
many, had he not practised withdrawal, which he found, in every
instance efficacious. By this means he made an interval of two
or three years between the births of each of his children. Hav
ing at last a family of six, his wife earnestly desired to have no
more ; and on one occasion, when she imagined that the necessary
precautions bad been neglected, she shed tears at the prospect of
again becoming pregnant. He said he knew, in his own neigh
bourhood, several married women who were rendered miserable
on account of their continued pregnancy, and would have given
any thing in the world to escape, but knew not how.”
This gentleman corroborated the opinion I have suggested
(page 50,) that the habit of withdrawal had an influence similar
to that of temperance in diet. Ke had found it, he said, much less
exhausting than unrestrained indulgence.
Another gentleman, also belonging to the Society of Friend^,
has since confirmed to me (as a fact proved to him by personal
experience) the above opinion. He likewise expressed his con
viction that the habit was greatly conducive to the preservation
of those first, fresh feelings, so beautiful, and, alas ! so evanes
cent,) under which the married usually come together.
.1
Tread—with armed thousands near—
And know not what it is to fear.
But greater far his meed of praise,
luster his claim to glory’s bays,
Who, true to reason’s voice, to virtue’s call,
Conquers himself, the noblest need of all.
R. D. O..
�APPENDIX.
In reply to a correspondent, J. W., who cites a case of Pria
*
pism mentioned in a Medical Journal some eight or ten years
6ince, and which pathological derangement he thinks was attri
butable to the habit of withdrawal, I reply, that the confurrent testimony of all who can speak from experience on the
subject, disproves not of course the fact he cites, but the propriety
of attributing the effect produced to the cause in question. Pria
pism, it is well known, is frequently caused by sexual excess ; and
was probably so caused in the case alluded to. Such excess is
much less likely to take place, when withdrawal is practised, than
during unrestrained indulgence.
It now remains for me to notice a communication which I re
cently received from a medical gentleman residing iu Indiana, for
whose character I entertain much respect. It regards the phy
siological portion of the work, which the writer, Dr. S----- -, thinks
is altogether inaccurate.
He refers me to Burns’, Denman’s, and Dewee’s Midwifery,
and especially to an essay by Dr. Caldwell, of Transylvania
University, on Generation, in proof that all are not agreed that
the semen must enter the uterus in order to effect impregnation.
He instances a case published in the New-York Medical Reposi
tory, and another in the Western Quarterly Reporter, in which
impregnation was effected, though immediately previous to the
child’s birth the vagina was found only large enough to admit a
common knitting needle, and the medical attendant had, in con
sequence, to make an artificial passage. And he argues, on the
authority of this and other instances where there existed such
mechanical obstruction in the vagina, os tincae,or colimn uteri, as
to render the passage of the seminal fluid next to impossible, that
tha^ fluid does not enter the uterus at all, and, consequently, that
the doctrine on which the whole work is founded, is physiologi
cal! y false; and, as being false, is calculated to do much and cruel
mischief. There are two chief theories, he says, now generally
received on the subject, the absorbent and the sympathetic ; ac
cording to both of which, all that appears absolutely necessary to
impregnation is, that the semen should be deposited somewhere in
the vagina; perhaps, to be taken up by a set of absorbent vessels,
and by them conveyed to the ovum, which ovum is, in its turn
taken up by thefinibriated ends of the Fallopian tube, and thereby
deposited in the uterus: perhaps (but I confess this seems to me
a very poetical theory,) merely to produce simultaneous anft
sympathetic action, thereby effecting the great and secret work
of nature.
�APPENDIX.
63
Now, my expression was, that “ almost all physiologists are
agreed, that the entrance of the sperm itself, or of some volatile
particles proceeding from it, into the uterus, must precede con
ception.”* The favorers of the absorbent theory will not, I pre
sume, deny this ; the few advocates of the sympathetic may.
Nor am I tenacious as regards any theory whatever, on a subject
of which the arcana still remain shrouded in comparative mystery.
Enough for my purpose, that the condition indispensable to repro
duction is, (as Dr. S----- himself reminds us,) the deposition of
the sperm in the vagina. The preventive suggested in “ Moral
Physiology,” positively precludes the fulfilment of this condition ;
and it could only have been, I imagine, by confounding it with
the partial expedient of which I have spoken, (page 50,) that
my medical friend arrived at the conclusion to which I have here
alluded.
The only argument which I conceive can be fairly urged against
it by the physiologist,j- is that to which I have adverted and replied:
(last paragraph of page 49.)
* In proof that I have not spoken unadvisedly on this subject, I may quote
what. I believe, is now considered the highest authority.
I “If the most recent works on Physiology are to be credited, the nterus, during
impregnation, opens a little, draws in the semen by inspiration, and directs it to
the ovarium by means of the Fallopian tubes, whose fimbriated extremity closely
embrace that organ.”—Magendie, p. 416, Philad. Ed.
SeealSd Blundell's and Haighton’s experiments on the rabbit, at Guy’s hospi
tal. See also Spallanzani’s experiments.
# I feel it to be my duty to add, that, since my arrival in England, I have heard
another physiological objection urged against this particular cheek ; namely, that
its influence on the female health is sometimes injurious. It has been suggested
that the deposition of sperm in the vagina cannot be dispensed with during the
.period of excitement, without producing mischievous consequeuces. In so far as
ttw may be a mere theoretical influence—a hazarded opinion, like so many other
opinions, as to “ what, in the nature of things, surely must be”—in this view of
it, I Conceive the objection entitled to little or no weight. But in so far as it may
be substantiated by facts, it is entitled to much weight. We want to know, not
what vague inference suggests, but what actual experience proves. If, unfortunattiy, experience should prove, that women, in availing themselves of this
eheck, do often, or do sometimes, lose their health, either in consequence of the
gtatifiertes being imperfect, or from any other cause, then the objection would
W fatal; and it would behove ns to enquire, whether some other check could
not be found, which even if less infallible, should be more innocent: sueb
�64
APPENDIX.
Having thus answered all the objections which have hitherto
’eached me, I conceive it unnecessary to lengthen this Appendix
by farther quotations approbatory of the work, or corroborative
of the facts it details. Let “Moral Physiology” abide the
ordeal of public examination ; if found wanting, to be cast aside
and forgotten; but if deemed true and useful, to be remembered
and approved.
perhaps, as the insertion into the vagina, previously to coition, of a small,
.moistened sponge, to he immediately afterwards withdrawn : or such as is sugJ
gested in the following extract of a letter which I lately received from a gentle
man of worth and respectability, residing near Manchester:—
“ A mother, whose health was such as to make child-bearing painful and
dangerous to her existence, was desirous, after giving birth to two children, no
urther to increase her family. Her husband’s fondness forbad him to act con
trary to the wishes of his wife: he had, from some source or other, obtained the
information given in your book, and he endeavoured to practise upon it; but
alas ! he was not sufficiently master of his feelings on one or two occasions, and
Lis wife again found herself enceinte.
“ After suffering, during the usual period, all the pains she had before ex
perienced, her health becoming daily more debilitated, she gave, at the narrow
risk of losing her life, birth to a poor little idiot.
“ Since then, a female friend informed her, that, were she to adopt the pre
caution of giving a strong cough immediately after, emission by her husband,
pregnancy would be prevented. She adopted this expedient, and with success.
“ A dear friend of mine, intimate with the lady of whom I have been speaking,
communicated the fact to me, and further assured me, that several females or
her acquaintance had adopted the check and proved its efficacy.
« If, Sir, this.be a sure preventive, 1 think it more safe and natural than with
drawal ; and preferable besides, as placing in the hands of the woman; who has
more caution and more to suffer also than our sex, the power over her destiny.’’
*“ I place these objections and suggestions, a6 they arise, before the public, though
I confess my doubt in regard to the general efficacy of the latter expedient. Let
all such suggestions be canvassed, and taken for what they are worth. Thus, and;
only thus, can truth be elicited.—Note to the Ninth edition
�
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/d2390be0dffcefafaad03423b15b8b59.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=g95neg9DRkdAdCXaFeWECjSrywegC49ZqQZO7B-40IglYunndj5Ww-CoLrFpFdfdx%7E5941TljkGMRPn-ka0sFEuObWv2OyvZEQNy8ZdG4RyOgU7soXKKvi2lqbNgCQnUphF2JO16n6pqjNF7GJhP3Zx2kc0crFWeAWD0XSRQA9SJbwHGo-Lxp%7EX0MAxhLH0sZUUW4PX0uGPfmoA6CI8qNOfKQR3s6jGc1ChuQlu9xo7sG-mjGtlcA3mzMTMono4hxESzLZjY8pdQdwg%7ElWTUVgUQVkdTebXYmavTo2qMzzR5khBgKKZq76B-FXnxJHProqBz-dk9-Up6hZNCkKQfew__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
49260617f5ebdb2a4e1980b24e5fb109
PDF Text
Text
V\j trrJ
N57^>
ev'
■
NATIONALSECULAR SOCIETY
��MORAL PHYSIOLOGY;
OR,
> gmf Mfr iUin
ON
THE POPULATION QUESTION.
.
by
: .■■:
'
j.i-kfi sri ifcrtf
*
bailor jJ
. .- 7f tj W aldr.'
*
,1
• ’ •
ROBERT DALE OWEN,
acthob of
"footfalls on
the boundabx of another wobld,”
BTC, BTC.
“ The principle of utility is the foundation of the present work.”
Bentham on Morals and Legislation.
" The diseases of Society can, no more than corporeal maladies, be
prevented or cured, without being spoken about in plain language.”
John Stuart Mill.
A NEW EDITION.
LONDON:
E. TRUELOVE, 256, HIGH HOLBOBN.
�c
*
*» The Frontispiece which accompanies this treatise, represents a poor
mother abandoning her infant, at the gate of the Hotel des Enfans trouves,
(Foundling Hospital) at Paris. The original painting is by Vigneron, a
French artist of celebrity; it was purchased at the price of one thousand
nollars for the Gallerie Royale, and is now in the possession of the French
king.
The Hotel des Enfans trouves, than which a more humane institution
was never founded, exhibits, in its every arrangement, order, economy,
and, above all, a beautiful tenderness to the feelings of those poor crea
tures who are thus compelled to avail themselves, for their offspring, of the
asylum it affords.. No obtrusive observation is made, no unfeeling question
asked : the infant charge is received in silence, and either trained and
supported until maturity, or, if circumstances, at any subsequent period,
enable the parents to claim their offspring, it is restored to their care.
There is surely no sect, of creed so frozen, or ritual so rigid, that it can
systematize away the common feelings of humanity, or dry up, in the
breasts of some gentler spirits, the milk of human kindness. The benevo
lent founder and indefatigable supporter of this noble institution, was a
esuit. . Be the good deeds of St. Vincent de Paul remembered, long after
the intrigues and cruelties of his fellow sectaries are forgotten 1
The case selected is one ofmild, of modified,—-I had almost said, of
favored misfortune : an extreme case were too revolting for representation.
But even under these comparatively happy circumstances, when benevo
lence extends her Samaritan care to the destitute and the forsaken, who
reoart^s f°r a moment the abandoned helplessness of the deserted
child, and the mute distress of the departing mother, but will join in the
exclamation, <f Alasthat it should ever have been born
�PREFACE
I
TO THE EIGHTH EDITION
(Published in London,)
I am requested to permit and to revise an English reprint
of “Moral Physiology;” and I accede to the request,
because the same deep conviction of the importance of the
views and
recommendations therein contained, which,
nearly two years ago, first prompted their publication, has
been still confirmed to me, in the strongest manner, during
the lapse of that period.
Myself a husband and a proprietor of land, my stake in
society may absolve me, in the eyes of those who require
such securities, from the suspicion of a design against do
mestic virtue or social order. For the rest, let the work
speak for itself. It contains the plain statement of a sub
ject, which deserves to be approached in its broadest and
simplest sense; and to be dispassionately investigated, in
connexion with its own physical and moral influence on
men and women, without reference to favorite theory or
political system.
London, September, 1832.
R. D. O
��PREFACE
TO THE FIRST EDITION.
(Published in New York.)
It may be proper to state, in few words, tlie immediate circumstances
which induced me to write and publish this treatise.
Some weeks since, a gentleman coming from England brought with him
two ingenious specimens of English typography. He had been requested by
a Brighton printer, who executed them, to present these, as specimens of
the progress of the art in Great Britain, to some of his brother craftsmen
in America. He gave them to me; I admired the ingenuity displayed in
the performance; but thought they ought to have been presented to some
printers’ society rather than to an individual. I therefore addressed them
to our Typographical Society in New-York, accompanied by a note, simply
requesting the society’s acceptance of them, as specimens of the art in
England.
I thought no more of the matter until I received, the other day, my spe
cimens back again, with a long and angry letter, signed by three of the
members, accusing me of principles subversive of every virtue under
heaven, and calculated to lead to the infraction of every commandment in
the decalogue: and, more especially, of having given my sanction to a
work, as they expressed it, “ holding out inducements and facilities for
the prostitution of our daughters, sisters, and wives.”
I subsequently learned from one of the society, circumstances which some
what extenuate this childish incivility. A gentleman who busied himself
last year in making out a notable reply to the “ Society for the Protection
of Industry,” got up, at a late Typographical meeting, and read to the so
ciety, several detached extracts from a pamphlet written by Richard Carlile,
entitled “ Every Woman’s Book,” which extracts he pronounced to be
excessively indecent; and asked the society whether they would receive
any thing at the hands of a man who publicly approved a book of a ten
dency so dreadfully immoral; which, he averred, I had done. The society
were (or affected to be) much shocked, and thereupon chose a committee
to return the heretical specimens, with the letter to which I have alluded.
�VI
PREFACE,
Probably some members of the society really did believe the work to be
of pernicious influence. Had some garbled extracts only from it been read
to me, I might have misconceived its tendency. But he must be blind
indeed, who can read the pamphlet through, and then, (whether he ap
prove it or not.) a.tribute other than good intentions to the individual who put it forth.
As to the book itself, I was requested, two years since, when residing
in Indiana, to publish it, but declined doing so My chief reasons were,
that I somewhat doubted its physiological correctness • that I did not con
sider its style atd tone in good taste ; but chiefly (as I expressed it in the
New Harmonv Gazette) because I feared it would be circulated in this
country, only “ to fall into the hands of the thoughtless, and to gratify the
curiosity of the licentious, instead of falling, as it ought, into the hands of
the philanthropist, ol the physiologist, and of every father and mother of a
family.” The circumstances I have just detailed may afford proof, that
my fears regarding the hands into which it might fall, were well founded.
My principles thus officiously and publicly attacked, I have felt it a duty
to step forward and vindicate them ; and this the rather, because, unless I
give my own sentiments, I shall be understood as unqualifiedly endorsing
Richard Carlile’s. Now, no one admires more than I do the courage
which induced that bold advocate of heresy to broach this important subject;
and to him be the praise accorded, that he was the first to venture it. But
the manner of his book I do not admire. There is in it that which was
repulsive, (I will not say revolting) to my feelings on the first perusal; and
though I afterwards began to doubt whether that first impression was not
attributable, in a measure, to my prejudices, yet I cannot doubt that
a similar, and even a more unfavorable impression, will be made on the
minds of others, and thus the interests of truth be jeopardised. Then
again, I think the physiological portion of his pamphlet somewhat in
correct as to the facts, and therefore calculated to mislead, where an error
might be of important consequence.
It may seem vanity in me to imagine, that this treatise is free from
similar objections; yet I have taken great pains to render it so.
r. d, a
New York, December, 1830.
�<»•
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
f
■
CHAPTER
■
' *
'
I.
INTRODUCTORY.
I sit down to write a little treatise, which will subject me
to abuse from the self-righteous, to misrepresentation from
the hypocritical, and to reproach even from the honestly
prejudiced. Some may refuse to read it; and many more
will misconceive its tendency. I would have delayed its
publication, had the choice been permitted me, until the
public was better prepared to receive it: but the enemies
of reform have already foisted the subject in an odious
form, on the public; and I have no choice left. If, there
fore, I touch the honest prejudices of any, let it be borne in
mind, that the occasion is not of my seeking.
The subject 1 intend to discuss is strictly physiological,
although connected, like many other physiological subjects,
with political economy, morals, and social science. In dis
cussing it, I must speak as plainly as physicians and phy
siologists do. What I mean, I must say. Pseudo-civilised
man, that anomalous creature who has been not inaptly de
fined “ an animal ashamed of his own body,” may take it
ill that I speak simply: I cannot help that.
A foreign princess, travelling towards Madrid to become
queen of Spain, passed through a little town of the penin
sula, famous for its manufactories of gloves and stockings.
The magistrates of the place, eager to evince their loyalty to
their new queen, presented her, on her arrival, with a sample
of those commodities for which their town was most remark
able. The major domo, who conducted the princess, received
the gloves very graciously; but, when the stockings were
presented, he flung them away with great indignation, and
severely reprimanded the magistrates for this egregious
pjece of indecency, “Know,” said he, “that a queen of Spain
has no legs.” *
I never could sympathise with this major-domo delicacy
and if you can, my reader, you had better throw this pamphlet
aside at once.
* See “ Memoires de la Cour d’Espagne,” by Madame d’Aunoy.
�8
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
If you have travelled and observed much, you will already
have learnt the distinction between real and artificial pro
priety. If you have been in Constantinople, you probably
know, that when any one of the grand seignor’s wives is ill,
the physician is allowed only to see her wrist, which is thrust
through an opening in the side of the room; because it is
improper even for a physician to look upon another man's
wife; and it is thought better to sacrifice health than
*
propriety.
If you have sojourned among the inhabitants of Turcomania, you know, that they consider a woman’s virtue sa
crificed for ever, if, before marriage, she be seen to stop on
the public road to speak to her lover ;f and if you have read
Buckingham’s travels, you may remember a very romantic
story, in which a young Turcoman lady, having thus forfeited
her reputation, is left for dead on the road by her brothers,
who were determined their sister should not survive her
dishonor.
Perhaps you may have travelled in Asia. If so, you can
not be ignorant how grossly indecorous to Asiatic ears it is,
to inquire of a husband after his wife’s health; and proba
bly you may know, that men have lost their lives to atone
for such an impropriety. You know, too, of course, that in
Eastern nations it is indecent for a woman to uncover her
face ; but perhaps you may not know, unless your travels
have extended to Abyssinia, that there the indecency consists
in uncovering the feet.J
In Central Africa, you may have seen women bathing in
public, without the slightest sense of impropriety ; but you
were doubtless told, that men could not be permitted a simi
lar liberty ; seeing that modesty requires they should perform
their ablutions in private.
If my reader has seen all or any of these countries and
customs, I doubt not that he or she will read my little book
understandingly; and interpretit in the purity which springs
from enlarged and enlightened views ; or, indeed, from com
mon sense. If not—if you who now peruse these lines have
been educated at home, and have never passed the boundary
line of your own nation—perhaps of your own village—if you
have not learnt that there are other proprieties besides those
of your country; and that, after all, genuine modesty has
* See Tournefort’s Travels in Turkey,
t See Buckingham’s Travels in Asia,
t See Bruce’s Travels in Abyssinia.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
9
*ts legitimate seat in the heart, not in the outward form or
sanctioned custom—then, I fear me, you may chance to cast
these pages from you, as the major domo did the proffered
stockings, unconscious that the indelicacy lies, not in.my
simple words, or the Spanish magistrates honest offeiing,
but in the pruriently sensitive imagination that discovers
impropriety in either. Yet, even though inexperienced, if
you be still young and pure-minded, you may read this
pamphlet through, and I shall fear from your lips, or in your
hearts, no unworthy misconstruction. .
Young men and women ! you who, if ignorant, are uncor
rupted also; you in whose minds honest and simple words
■call up none but honest and simple ideas ; you who think no
evil ; you who are still believers in human virtue and human
happiness ; you who, like our fabled first parents in their
paradise, are yet unlearned alike in the hypocritical conven
tionalities and the odious vices of pseudo-civilization ; you
with whom love is stronger than fear, and the law within the
breast more powerful than that in the statute-book; you
whose feelings are still unblunted, and whose sympathies
•till warm and generous ; you who belong to the better por
tion of your species, and who have formed your opinion of
mankind from guileless spirits like your own—young men
and women 1 it is to your pure feelings I would speak : it is
by your unsophisticated hearts I would fain have my treatise
and my motives judged.
Libertines and debauchees! this book is not for you. You
are unable to appreciate the subject of which it treats. Bring
ing to its discussion, as you must, a distrust or contempt, of
the human race—accustomed, as you unfortunately are, to
confound liberty with licence, and pleasure with debauchery,
your palled feelings and brutalized senses no longer suffice
to distinguish moral truth in its purity and simplicity. I
never discuss this subject with such as you ; because I
esteem it useless, and know it disagreeable, to do so. It has
been remarked, that nothing is so suspicious in a woman as
vehement pretensions to especial chastity : it is no less true,
that the most obtrusive and sensitive stickler tor the etiquette
of orthodox morality is the heartless rake. The little inter
course I have had with men of your stamp, warns me to
avoid the discussion of any species of moral heresy with
you. You approach such subjects in a tone and spirit re
volting alike to good taste and good feeling. You seem to
presuppose—from your own experience, perhaps—that the
hearts of all men, and more especially of all women, are
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
9
*ts legitimate seat in the heart, not in the outward form or
sanctioned custom—then, I fear me, you may chance to cast
these pages from you, as the major domo did the proffered
stockings, unconscious that the indelicacy lies, not in.my
simple words, or the Spanish magistrates honest offeiing,
but in the pruriently sensitive imagination that discovers
impropriety in either. Yet, even though inexperienced, if
you be still young and pure-minded, you may read this
pamphlet through, and I shall fear from your lips, or in your
hearts, no unworthy misconstruction. .
Young men and women ! you who, if ignorant, are uncor
rupted also; you in whose minds honest and simple words
■call up none but honest and simple ideas ; you who think no
evil ; you who are still believers in human virtue and human
happiness ; you who, like our fabled first parents in their
paradise, are yet unlearned alike in the hypocritical conven
tionalities and the odious vices of pseudo-civilization ; you
with whom love is stronger than fear, and the law within the
breast more powerful than that in the statute-book; you
whose feelings are still unblunted, and whose sympathies
•till warm and generous ; you who belong to the better por
tion of your species, and who have formed your opinion of
mankind from guileless spirits like your own—young men
and women 1 it is to your pure feelings I would speak : it is
by your unsophisticated hearts I would fain have my treatise
and my motives judged.
Libertines and debauchees! this book is not for you. You
are unable to appreciate the subject of which it treats. Bring
ing to its discussion, as you must, a distrust or contempt, of
the human race—accustomed, as you unfortunately are, to
confound liberty with licence, and pleasure with debauchery,
your palled feelings and brutalized senses no longer suffice
to distinguish moral truth in its purity and simplicity. I
never discuss this subject with such as you ; because I
esteem it useless, and know it disagreeable, to do so. It has
been remarked, that nothing is so suspicious in a woman as
vehement pretensions to especial chastity : it is no less true,
that the most obtrusive and sensitive stickler tor the etiquette
of orthodox morality is the heartless rake. The little inter
course I have had with men of your stamp, warns me to
avoid the discussion of any species of moral heresy with
you. You approach such subjects in a tone and spirit re
volting alike to good taste and good feeling. You seem to
presuppose—from your own experience, perhaps—that the
hearts of all men, and more especially of all women, are
�10
MOKAL PHYSIOLOG f.
deceitful above all things and desperately wicked ; that vio
lcnce and vice are inherent in human nature, and that
nothing but laws and ceremonies prevent the world from
becoming a vast slaughter-house or a universal brothel.
You are led to judge your own sex and the other by the
specimens you have met with in haunts of mercenary pro
fligacy ; and, with such a standard in your minds, I niarvel
not that you remain incorrigible unbelievers in any virtue,
but that which is forced in the prudish hot-bed of ceremoni
ous conformity. You willnot trust the natural soil, watered
from the free skies and warmed by the life-bringing sun.
How should you? you have never seen it produce but weeds
and poisons. Libertines and debauchees ! cast my book
aside! You will find in it nothing to gratify a licentious
curiosity ; and, if you read it, you will probably only give
me credit for motives and impulses like your own.
And you, prudes and hypocrites ! you who strain at a gnat
and swallow a camel ; you whom Jesus likened to whited
sepulchres, which without indeed are beautiful, but within
are full of all unclcanness; you who affect to blush if the
ancle is incidentally mentioned in conversation, or displayed
in crossing a stile, but will read indecencies enough, without
scruple, in your closets; you who, at dinner, ask to be helped
to the bosom of a duck, lest, by mention of the word breast,
you call up improper associations; you who have nothing
but a head and feet and fingers ; you who look demure by
daylight, and make appointments only in the dark—you,
prudes and hypocrites ! I address not. Even if honest in
your prudery, your ideas of right and wrong are so artificial
and confused, that you are not likely to profit by the present
discussion; if dishonest, I desire to have no communication
with you.
Reader! if you belong to the class of prudes or libertines,
I pray you, follow my argument no farther. My heresies
will not suit you. As a prude, you will find them too honest;
as a libertine, too temperate. In the former case, you will
call me a very shocking person ; in the latter, a quiz or a bore.
But if you be honest, upright, pure-minded ; if you be
unconscious of unworthy motive or selfish passion ; if truth
be your ambition, and the welfare of our race your objectthen approach with me a subject the most important to man s
W'ell-being ; and approach it, as I do, in a spirit of dispas
sionate, disinterested, free inquiry. Approach it, resolving
to prove all things, and hold fast that which is good. 1 ho
discussion is one to which it is every man’s and every wo •
�11
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
man’s duty, (and ought to be every one’s business,) to attend.
The welfare of the present generation, and—yet far more—of
the next, requires it; common sense sanctions it; and the t
national motto of my former country, “ Honi soit qui mal y <
pcnse,” * may explain the spirit in which it is undertaken,
and in which it ought to be received.
Reader! it ought to concern you nothing who or what I _
am, who now address you. Truth is truth, if it fall from t
Satan’s lips; and error ought to be rejected, though preached
by an angel from heaven. Even as an anonymous work,
therefore, this treatise ought to obtain a full and candid
examination from you. But, that you may not imagine I
am ashamed of honestly discussing a subject so useful and
important, I have given you my name on the title page.
Neither is it any concern of yours what my character is, or
has been. No man of sense or modesty unnecessarily ob
trudes personalities that regard himself, on the public. And,
most assuredly, it is neither to gratify your curiosity nor my
vanity, if I now do violence to my feelings, and speak a few
words touching myself. I do so, to disarm, if I can, preju
dice of her sting, thus obtaining the ears of the prejudiced ;
and to acquaint my readers, that they are conversing with
one whom circumstance and education have happily pre
served from habits of excess and associations of profligacy.
All those who have known the life and private habits of
the writer of this little treatise, will bear him witness, that
what he now states is true, to the letter. He was in
debted to his parents for habits of the strictest temperancesome would call it, abstemiousness—in all things. He never,
at any time, habitually used ardent spirits, wine, or strong
drink of any kind : latterly, he has not even used animal
food. He never entered a brothel in his life ; nor associated,
even for an evening, with those poor, unhappy victims, whom
the brutal, yet tolerated vices of men, or their own unsus
picious or ungoverned feelings, have betrayed to misery and
* One of the English kings, Edward III., in the year 1344, picked up
from the floor of a ball-room, an embroidered garter belonging to a
lady of rank. In returning it to her, he checked the rising smile of his
courtiers with the words, “ Honi soit qui mal y pense ! ” or, paraphrased
in English, “ Shame on him who invidiously interprets it!” The senti
ment has become the motto of the English national arms. It is one
which might be not inaptly nor unfrequently applied in rebuking the
mawkish, skin-deep, and intolerant morality of this hypocritical and pro
fligate age.
�12
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
degradation. He never sought the company but of the intei
lectual and self-respecting of the other sex, and has no asso
ciations connected with the name of woman, but those of
esteem and respectful affection. To this day, he is even
girlishly sensitive to the coarse and ribald jests in which
young men think it witty to indulge at the expense of a
sex they cannot appreciate. The confidence with which
women may have honored him, he has never selfishly abused;
and, at this moment, he has not a single wrong with which
to reproach himself towards a sex, which he considers the
equal of man in all the essentials of character, and his su
perior in generous disinterestedness and moral worth.
I check my pen. I have said enough, perhaps, to awaken
the confidence of those whose confidence I value; enough,
assuredly to excite the ridicule, or the sneer, of him who
walks through life wrapped up in the cloak of conformity,
and laughs, among his private boon companions, at the
scruples of every novice, who will not, like himself, regard
debauchery and seduction (in secret) as manly and spirited
amusements.
And now, reader! if I have succeeded in awakening your
attention, and enlisting in this inquiry your reason and your
better feelings, approach with me a subject the most interest
ing and important to you, to me, to all our fellow-creatures.
If you be a woman, forget that I am a man : if a man, listen
to me as you would to a brother. Let us converse, not as
men, nor as women, but as human beings, with common in
terests, instincts, wants, weaknesses. Let us converse, if it
be possible, without prejudice and without passion. What
ever be your sex, sect, rank, or party, to you I address 1lie
poet’s exhortation—here, far more strictly applicable, than in
the investigation to which he applied it—
“ Retire I the world shut out: thy thoughts call home;
Imagination’s airy wing repress;
Lock up thy senses ; let no passion stir j
Wake all to reason j let her reign alone.”
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
CHAPTER II.
STATEMENT OF THE SUBJECT.
Among the various instincts which contribute to man's pre
servation and well-being, the instinct of reproduction holds a
distinguished rank. It peoples the earth; it perpetuates
the species. Controlled by reason and chastened by good
feeling, it gives to social intercourse much of its charm and
zest. Directed by selfishness, or governed by force, it is pro
lific of misery and degradation. Whether wisely or unwisely
directed, its influence is that of a master principle, that
colors, brightly or darkly, much of the destiny of man.
It is sometimes spoken of as a low and selfish propensity ;
and the Shakers call it a “ carnal and sensual passion/’* I
see nothing in the instinct itself that merits such epithets.
Like other instincts, it may assume a selfish, mercenary, or
brutal character. But, in itself, it appears to me the most
social and least selfish of all our instincts. It fits us to give,
even while receiving, pleasure ; and, among cultivated beings,
the former power is ever more highly valued than the latter.
Not one of our instincts affords larger scope for the exercise
of disinterestedness, or fitter play for the best moral sentiments
of our race. Not one gives birth to relations more gentle,more
humanizing and endearing; not one lies more immediately
at the root of the kindliest charities and most generous lmpulses that honor and bless human nature. Its very power,
indeed, gives fatal force to its aberrations ; even as the waters
of the calmest river, when dammed up or forced from their
bed, flood and ruin the country : but the gentle flow and fer
tilising influence of the stream are the fit emblems of the in
stinct, when suffered, undisturbed by force or passion, to
follow its own quiet channel.
That such an instinct should be thought and spoken of as
a low, selfish propensity, and, as such, that the discussion of
its nature and consequences should be almost interdicted
among human beings, is to me a proof ot the profligacy
of the age, and the impurity of the pseudo-civilized
mind. I imagine, that if all men and women were gluttons
• See “ A brief Exposition of the Principles of the United Society
calledShakers,” published by Calvin Green and Seth Y. Wells, Albany,
N.Y,, 1830,
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
and drunkards, they would, in like manner, be ashamed to
^peak of diet or temperance.
Were I an optimist, and had I accustomed myself to
judge and to admire the arrangements of nature, I should
he inclined to put forward, as one of the most admirable,
the arrangement according to which the temperate fulfil
ment of the dictates of this, as of almost all other instincts,
confers pleasure. The desire of offspring would probably
induce us to perpetuate the species, though no gratifica
tion were connected with the act. In the language of the
optimist, then, “ pleasure is gratuitously superadded.” But,
instead of pausing to admire arrangements and intentions, the
great whole of which human reason seems little fitted to ap
preciate or comprehend, I content myself with remarking,
that this very circumstance (in itself surely a fortunate one,
* inasmuch as it adds another to the sources of human happi
ness) has often been the cause of misery; and, from a bless
ing, has been perverted into a curse. Enjoyment has led to
excess, and sometimes to tyranny and barbarous injustice.
Were the reproductive instinct disconnected from pleasure
of any kind, it would neither afford enjoyment nor admit of
abuse. As it is, the instinct is susceptible of either: just as
wisdom or ignorance governs human laws, habits and cus
toms. It behooves us, therefore, to be especially careful in
its regulation, lest what is a great good may become a great
evil.
This instinct, then, may be regarded in a two-fold light;
first, as giving the power of reproduction ; second, as afford
ing pleasure.
And here, before I proceed, let me call to the reader’s
mind, that it is the province of rational beings to bear utility
strictly in view. Reason recognises the romantic and un
earthly reveries of Stoicism, as little as she does the doctrines
of health-destroying and mind-debasing debauchery. She
reprobates equally a contemning and an abusing of pleasure
She bids us avoid asceticism on the one hand, and excess on
the other. In all our inquiries, then, let reason guide us.
and let utility be our polar star.
I have often had long arguments with my friends, the
*
'Shakers, touching the two-fold light in which the reproduc* I call them my friends, because, however little I am disposed to
accede to their peculiar principles, I have met, from among their body, a
great proportion of individuals who have taken with them my friendship
and sympathy.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
15
live instinct may be regarded. They commonly stand out
stoutly against the propriety of considering it except simply
as a means of perpetuating the species ; and they deny that it
may be regarded as a legitimate source of enjoyment. In
this 1 totally dissent from them. It is a much more noble,
because less purely selfish,instinct, than hunger or thirst; and,
though it differ from hunger and thirst in this,that it may re
main ungratified without causing death, I have yet to learn,
I that because it fe possible, it is therefore also desirable, to
mortify and repress it. I admit, to the Shakers, that in the
world, profligate and hypocritical as we see it, this instinct is
the source of much misery ; and that if I bad to choose between
the life of the profligate man of the world and that of the asce
tic Shaker, 1 should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.
But, for admitting that the most social and kindly of human
instincts is sensual and degrading in itself, I cannot. I think
its influence moral, humanising, polishing, beneficent; and
that the social and physical education of no man or woman is
fully completed without it. Its mortification (though far less
injurious than its excess) is very mischievous. If it do
not give birth to peevishness, or melancholy, or incipient dis
ease, or unnatural practices, at least it almost always freezes
and stiffens the character ; checking the flow of its kindliest
emotions, and not unfrequently giving to it a solitary, anti
social, selfish stamp.
I deny the position of the Shaker, then, that the indul
gence of the instinct is justifiable (if, indeed, it be justifiable
at all) only as necessary to the reproduction of the species.
It is justifiable, in my view, just in as far as it makes man a
happier and a better being. It is justifiable, both as a source
of temperate enjoyment, and as a means by which the sexes
mutually polish and improve each other.
If a Shaker has read my little book thus far, and cannot re
concile his mind to this idea, he may as well close it at once.
I found all my arguments on the position, that the pleasure
derived from this instinct, independent of and totally distinct
from its ultimate object, the reproduction of our race, is good,
proper, worth securing and enjoying. I maintain, that its
temperate enjoyment is a blessing, both in itself and in its
influence on human character.
Upon this distinction of the instinct into its two-fold cha
racter, rests the present discussion. It sometimes happens,
nay, it happens every day and hour, that mankind obey it»
dictates, not from any calculation of consequences, but sim
ply from animal impulse. Thus many children who are
�16
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY,
brought into the world owe their existence, not to deliberate
conviction in their parents that their birth is desirable, but
simply to an unreasoning instinct, which men, in the mass,
have not learnt either to resist or control.
V
It is a serious question—and surely an exceedingly proper
and important one—whether man can obtain, and whether ■
he is benefitted by obtaining, control over this instinct Is
IT DESIRABLE THAT IT SHOULD NEVER BE GRATIFIED WITH
OUT AN INCREASE TO POPULATION ? Or, IS IT DESIRABLE,
THAT, IN GRATIFYING IT, MAN SHALL BE ABLE TO SAY WHE
THER OFFSPRING SHALL BE THE RESULT OR NOT ?
To answer the questions satisfactorily, it would be neces
sary to substantiate, that such control may be obtained with
out injury to the physical health, or violence to the moral
feelings; and also, that it may be obtained without any
leal sacrifice of enjoyment; or, if that cannot be, with as
little as possible.
This is the plain statement of the subject. It resolves
itself into two distinct heads: first, the desirability of such
control, and, secondly, its possibility.
In examining its desirability, we enter a wide field, a field
often traversed by political economists, by moralists, and by
philosophers, though generally, it will be confessed, to little
purpose. This may be, in a great measure, attributed rather
to their fear than their ignorance. The world would not
permit them to say what they knew. I intend that my
readers shall know all that I know on the subject; for 1
have ceased to ask the world’s leave to say what I think
and what I believe to be useful to the public.
I propose to consider the question in the abstract, and
then to examine it in its political and social bearings.
CHAPTER III.
THE QUESTION EXAMINED IN THE ABSTRACT.
Is it in itself desirable, that man should obtain control over
the instinct of reproduction, so as to determine when its
gratification shall produce offspring, and when it shall not?
But that men have not accustomed themselves to free and
dispassionate reflection, and that the various superstitions
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
17
of the nursery pervade the opinions and cramp the inquiries •
of after-life;—but for this, the very statement of the
question might suffice to obtain for it the assent of every
rational being. Nothing so elevates a man above the brute
creation, as the due control of his instincts. The lower animal
follows them blindly, unreflectingly. The serpent gorges
Himself; the bull fights, even to death, with his rival of the
pasture : the dog makes deadly war for a bone. They know
nothing of progressive improvement. The elephant or the
beaver of the nineteenth century, are just as wise and no
wiser, than the elephant or the beaver of two thousand years
ago. "Man alone has the power to improve, to cultivate, to
elevate his nature, from generation to generation. He alone
can control his instincts by reflection of consequences, and
regulate his passions by the precepts of wisdom.
It is strange, that even at this period of the world, we
should have to remind each other, that all knowledge of facts
is useful; or, at the least, that it cannot be injurious. The
knowledge of some facts may be unimportant; the know
ledge of none is mischievous. A human being is a puppet,
a glave, if his ignorance is to be the safeguard of his virtue.
Nor shall we know where to stop, if we follow up this prin
ciple. Shall we give our sons lessons in mechanics? but
they may thereby learn to pick locks. Shall we teach them
to read ? but they may thus obtain access to falsehood and
folly. Shall we instruct them in writing? but they may
become forgers.
Such, in effect, was the reasoning of men in the dark ages.
vVhen Walter Scott puts in the mouth of Lord Douglas, on
the discovery of Marmion’s treachery, the following excla
mation, it is strictly in accordance with the spirit and pre
vailing opinions of the times :
“ A letter forged 1 Saint Jude to speed
Did ever knight so foul a deed 1
At first in heart it liked me ill,
When the king praised his clerkly skill.
Thanks to Saint Bothan, son of mine,
Save Gawain, ne’er could pen a line
So swore I, and so swear I still,
Let my boy bishop fret his fill.”
The days are gone by when ignorance can be the safeguard
of virtue. The only rock-foundation for virtue is knowledge.
There is no fact, in physics or in morals, that ought to be
concealed from the inquiring mind. Let that parent who
B
�18
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY,
thinks to secure lis sons’honesty or his daughters’innocence
by keeping back from them facts—let that parent know,
that he is building up their morality on a sandy founda
tion. The rains and the floods of the world’s influence shall
beat upon that virtue, and great shall be the fall thereof.
If, then, man can obtain control over this most important
of instincts, it is, in principle, right that he should know it.
If men, after obtaining such knowledge, think fit not to use
it; if they deem it nobler and more virtuous, to follow each
animal impulse, like the beasts of the field and the fowls of
the air, without a thought of its consequences, or an inquiry
into its nature—let them do so. The knowledge that they
have the power to act more like rational beings will not
injure, if it fail to benefit, them. They may set it aside, may
neglect it, may forget it, if they can. Only let them show
common sense enough to permit that others,who are more slow
to incur sacred responsibilities, and more willing to give
reason the control of instinct, should obtain the requisite
knowledge, and follow out their prudent resolutions.
If this little book were in the hands of every adult in the
United States, not one need profit by it, unless he saw fit.
Nor will any man admit, that he can possibly be injured by it.
Oh no 1 His virtue can bear any quantity of light. But then,
his neighbour’s, or his son’s, or his daughter’s!
This would lead me to discuss the social bearings of the
question. But, as conceiving it more in order, I shall first
speak of it in connexion with political economy.
CHAPTER IV.
THE QUESTION IN ITS CONNEXION WITH POLITICAL ECONOMY.
The population question, as it is called, has of late years
occupied much attention, especially in Great Britain. It
was first prominently brought forward and discussed there in
the year 1798, by Malthus, an English clergyman. Godwin,
Ricardo, Place, Mill, Thompson, Robert Owen, and other
celebrated cotemporary writers, have all discussed it, with
more or less reserve, and at greater or less length.
Malthus’ work has become the text book of a large poli
tico-economist party in England. His doctrine is that
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
]£)
“population, unrestrained, will advance beyonS the means of
subsistence.” He asserts, that, in most countries, population
at this moment presses against the means of subsistence;
and that, in all countries, it has a tendency so to do. He
recommends, as a preventive of the growing evil, celibacy
till a late age, say thirty years ; and he asserts, that unless
this “moral restraint” be exerted, vice, poverty and misery
must continue to be the checks to population. The ten
dency of such principles appears to me very mischievous;
though, upon the whole, the work of Mr. Malthus, by pro
voking inquiry, will, I doubt not, prove a source of good.
I have heard some of his disciples openly declare, that they
considered the crimes and wretchedness of society to be
necessary—to be the express ordainings of Providence in
tended to prevent the earth from being overpeopled. I
have heard it argued by men of rank, wealth and influence,
that the distinctions of rich and poor, and even of morality
and immorality, of luxury and want, will and must exist to
the end of the world ; that he who attempts to remove them
fights against God and nature ; and, if he partiaJly succeed,
will but afford the human race an opportunity to increase,
until the earth shall no longer suffice to contain them, and
men shall be compelled to prey on each other. It must bo
confessed, that this is a comfortable doctrine for the rich idler;
it is a healing salve to the luxurious conscience ; an opiate to
drown the still small voice of truth and humanity, which calls
to every man to be up and do his part towards the alleviation
of the human suffering that everywhere stares himin the face.
*
It is vain to argue with the defenders of the evils that be,
that, for the present, there is land and every other necessary
in abundance for all, if there were wisdom in the distribu
tion ; and that the day of ultimate overstocking is afar off.
They tell you, that day must come at last; and that the more
you do to remove vice and misery—those destroyers of popu
lation—the sooner it will come. And what reply can one
make to the argument in the abstract? I believe it to be
true, that population, unrestrained,f will double itself on an
* Let me not be understood as charging on Mr. Malthus himself a style
of reasoning he disclaims. I do but remind the reader how easilv weak
or selfish men may pervert his doctrine to mischievous purposes.
t By unrestrained, Malthus and his disciples mean, not restricted or
destroyed by any incidental check whatever, moral or immoral, pruden
tial or violent. Thus, poverty, war, libertinism, famine, &c. are allclteckR
*o population. In this sense, and not simply as applying to preventive
moral restraint, have I employed the word throughout this chapter.
B2
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
20
average every twenty-five to fifty years. If so, it is evidvnt
to a demonstration, that, if population were not restrained,
morally or immorally, the earth would at last furnish scarcely
foothold for the human beings produced.
Take the least rapid of the above rates of increase, and
say, that population, unrestrained, will double itself every
fifty years. That it has done so, (without reckoning the
increase from emigration,) in many parts of this continent
is certain.
Then, if we suppose the present numerous checks to po
pulation, viz. want, war, vice, and misery, removed by
rational reform, and if we assume the present population of
the world at one thousand millions, we shall find the rate
of increase as follows:—At the end of
100 years, there would be four thousand millions.
200 —------------------------ sixteen thousand millions.
300 -------------------------- sixty-four thousand millions.
400 --------------------------- two hundred and fifty-six thou
sand millions.
And so on, multiplying by 4 for every hundred years. So
that, in 500 years, if we imagine unchecked increase, there
would be more than a thousand times as many as at present;
and in 1,000 years, upwards of a million times as many
human beings as at this moment.
It is evident, then, to demonstration, that there is notspace
on this earth for population, under any circumstances, to in
crease unrestrained, during more than a very few hundred
years. We are thus compelled to admit to Malthus, that, sooner
or later, some restraint or other to population mast be em
ployed ; and compelled to admit to his aristocratic ex
pounders, that if no other better restraint than vice and
misery can be found, then vice and misery must be; they are
the lot of man, from generation to generation.
Let me repeat it: it is no question—never can be a ques
tion—whether there shall be a restraint to population or not.
There must be; unless indeed we imagine communication
opened with other planets, so that we may people them.
In the nature of things, there must be a check, of some
kind. The only question is, what that check shall be—
whether, as heretofore, the check of war, want, profligacy,
misery; or a “ moral restraint,” suggested by experience
and sanctioned by reason.
Let those, then, who cry out against this little treatise, be
told, that though they may postpone the question, no human
power can evade it. It must come up. Had the friends of
reform been left to choose their own time it might, perhaps
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
21
With advantage, have been postponed. And it is an imagi
nable case, that prejudice might delay it until a general
famine or a universal civil war became the frightful checks.
But will any man of common sense argue the propriety of
suffering such a crisis to approach?
Malthus saw this. He saw that some check must exist;
and, whatever some of his disciples might say, he did not
intend to be considered the apologist of vice and misery
His theory, indeed, supplied specious arguments to those
who assert, with the ingenious author of the Fable of the
*
Bees, that “ private vices are public benefits
and fur
nished a comfortable excuse for supine contentment witji a
vicious and degrading order of things. But Malthus him
self declares the only proper check to be, the general prac
tice of celibaey to a late age. He employs all his eloquence
to persuade men and women that they ought not to marry
till they are twenty-eight or thirty years of age ; and that, if
they do, they are contributing to the misery of the world.
Now, Mr. Malthus may preach for ever on this subject.
Individuals may indeed be found, who will look to distant
consequences, and sacrifice present enjoyment; even as indi
viduals are found to become and remain Shaking Quakers:
but to believe that the mass of mankind will abjure, through
the ten fairest years of lite, the nearest and dearest of social
relations ; and during the very holiday of existence, will live
the life of monks and nuns—all to atone for a mal-administration of the earth’s resources, or to avert an ultimate catas
trophe which is confessedly some hundreds of years distant—
to believe this, requires a faith, which no accurate observer
of mankind possesses.
This weak point the aristocratic expounders of Malthus’
doctrines were not slow to discover. They broadly asserted,
that such “moral restraint” would never be generally prac
tised. They asked, whether a young woman, to whom a
comfortable home and a pleasant companion were offered,
would refuse to accept them, on this theory of population ;
whether a young man who had a fair (or even but a very
indifferent) prospect of maintaining a family, would doom
himself to celibacy, lest lhe world should be overpeopled.
And they put it to the advocates of late marriages, whether,
in one sex at least, the recommendation, if even nominally
followed, would not almost certainly lead to vicious excess
• Mandeville
�22
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
and degrading- associations ; thus resolving the check at last
into vice and misery. As experience answers these ques
tions in the negative, is it not clear, (they proceeded exultingly to ask,) that vice and misery are the natural lot of man;
and that it is quixotic, if not impious, to plague ourselves
about them, or to attempt, by their suppression, to contro
vert the decrees of God 1
It was very easy for generous feelings to reply to so heart
less an argument. It was easy to ask, whether even the
apparent hopelessness of the case formed any legitimate apo
logy for supine indifference ; or whether, where we cannot
cure, we are absolved from the duty of alleviating. But it
was not very easy fully and fairly to meet the whole question.
It was idle to deny that preaching would not put off mar
riage for ten years: and if no other species of moral restraint
than ten years Shakerism could be proposed, it did ap
pear evident enough, that moral restraint would be by the
mass neglected, and that the physical checks of vice and
misery must come into play at last.
I pray my readers, then, distinctly to observe, how the
matter stands. Population, unrestrained, must increase
beyond the possibility of the earth and its produce to support.
At present ft is restrained by vice and misery. The only
remedy which the orthodoxy of the English clergyman
permits him to propose, is, late marriages. The most en
lightened observers of mankind are agreed, that nothing con
tributes so positively and immediately to demoralize a nation,
as when its youth refrain, until a late period, from forming
disinterested connexions with those of the other sex. The
frightful increase of prostitutes, the destruction of health,
the rapid spread of intemperance, the ruin of moral feelings,
are, to the mass, the certain consequences. Individuals
there are, who escape the contagion; individuals whose
better feelings revolt, under any temptation, from the mer
cenary embrace, or the Circean cup of intoxication ; but these
are exceptions only. The mass will have their pleasures, the
pleasures of intellectual intercourse, of unbought affection,
and of good taste and good feeling, if they can ; but if they
cannot, then such pleasures (alas! that language should be
perverted to entitle them to the name!) as the sacrifice of
money and the ruin of body and mind can purchase.
*
* Lawrence, the ingenious author of the “ Empire of the Nairs,”
says, shrewdly enough: “ Wherever the women are prudes* the men
will be drunkards."
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
'
23
But this is not all. Not only is Malthus’ proposition
fraught with immorality, in that it discountenances to a latt
age those disinterested sexual connexions which can alone
save youth from .vice ; but it is ineradicable. Men and
women will scarcely pause to calculate .‘he chances they have
of affording support to their children ere they become
parents : how, then, should they stop to calculate the chances
of the world’s being overpeopled ? Mr. Malthus may say what
he pleases, they never will make any such calculation; and
it is folly to expect they should.
Let us observe, then: unless some less ascetic and more
vracticable species of “ moral restraint” be‘introduced, vice and
misery will ultimately become the inevitable lot of man. He
can no more escape them, than he can the light ot the sun,
or the stroke of death.
What an incitement, this, to the prosecution of our in
quiry 1 Here is an argument put forth, wLMi is all but an
apology for the apathy that prevails among the rich and the
powerful—among governors and legislators—in regard to
human improvement. How important, how essential for the
interests of virtue that it should be refuted! How beneficent
that knowledge, wtich discloses to us some moral practi
cable check to population, and relieves us from the despairing
conclusion, that the irrevocable doom of man is misery, with
out remedy and without end ! In the absence of such know
ledge, truly the prospects of the world were dark and cheer
less. Philanthropy herself pauses, when she begins to fear
that all her exertions are to result inhopetess disappointment.
And yet—such is this world—even the ablest opponents of
Malthus stop short when they come to the question, and
leave an argument unanswered, which a dozen pages might
suffice for ever to set at rest.
Let one of the most intellig nt of these opponents—a man
of sterling talent—let Mill, be well-known political econo
mist, and author of “ British L.'dia,” speak for himself:
“ What are the best means of checking the progress of
population, when it cannot go on unrestraired without pro
ducing one or other of two most undesirable effects, either
drawing an undue portion of the population to the mere
raising of food, or producing poverty and wretchedness, it is
not now the time to inquire. It is, indeed, the most important
practical problem to which the wisdom of lhe politician and the
tliorali^ can be applied. It has, till this time, been miserably
evaded by all those who have meddled with the subject, as
well as by these who were called on by lheir situation to find
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
24
a remedy for the evils to which it relates. And yet, if the.
superstitions of the nursery were disregarded, and the principle
of utility hept steadily in view, a solution might not be very
difficult to be found; and the means of drying up one of the
most copious sources of human evil—a source which, if all
other sources were taken away, might alone suffice to retain the
great mass of human beings in misery, might be seen to be
neither doubtful nor difficult to be applied.”—Art. Colony,
Encyclopaedia Britannica.
Let my readers bear in mind, that this is from the pen oi
one of the most admired writers of the present day; a man
celebrated throughout Europe, for his works on political
economy, and whose writings are not unknown on this side
the Atlantic. He considers the question now under discus
sion to involve “ the most important problem to which the
wisdom of the politician and moralist can be applied.” This
question, he admits, has ever been “ miserably evaded.”
Yet even a man so influential and clear-sighted as Mill,
must, himself yield to the weakness he reprobates; must speak
in parables, as the Nazarene reformer did before him; and,
even while commenting on the “ miserable evasion” of a
subject so engrossingly important, must imitate the very
evasion he despises.
*
I will not imitate it. I am more independently situated
than was the English economist; and I see, as clearly as he
does, the extreme importance of the subject. What he saw
and declared ought to be said, I will say.
Before concluding this chapter, let me distinctly state an
opinion, from which Mr. Malthus himself, if I read his doc
trine aright, will hesitate to dissent. I am convinced, that,
at this moment, there is nothing approaching to an excess
of population, absolutely considered, in a single country of
Europe. Iniquitous laws, false education, and a vicious
order of things, are continually producing effects, which are
erroneously attributed to over-population; effects which
spring, not from the number, but from the ignorance, of men.
Monopolies favour the rich, imposts oppress the poor, com
mercial rivalry grinds to the dust the victims of an over
grown system of competition. To such causes as these, ana
not to positive excess of people, at the time being, is the dis
tress, more or less felt over the civilized world, to be attri
buted. Still, it is undeniable that the most perfect system of
* I speak here, as regretting the circumstance, not as censuring the
individual. It is probable, that had Mr. Mill spoken more plainly, his
essay would have been refused admission into the Encyclopasdia.
�OPAL. PHYSIOLOGY.
25
political or social economy in the world could not, of itself,
prevent the ultimate evils of superabundant population. A nd,
it is no less certain, that, in the meantime, the pressure ol a
large family on the labouring man greatly augments his
difficulties, and often deprives him of that leisure which he
might employ in devising means to better his condition, in
stead of leaving public, business in the hands of political
gamblers.
Vice-bringing laws and customs ought to be—must be
changed ; but while the grass is growing, let us prevent the
horse from starving, if we can
Thus (and I am desirous it be distinctly understood) a
solution of the population question is here offered, as an
alleviation of existing evils, not as a cure for them ; as a pal
liative, not as a remedy, for the national disease. Population
might be but a tenth part of what it is, and unjust legislation'
and vicious customs would still give birth, as they now do, to
extravagance and want. It is true, and ought to be remem
bered, that the check I propose, by diminishing the number
of laborers, will render labor more scarce and consequently
of higher value in the market; and in this view, its political
importance is considerable: but it may also be doubted
whether our present overgrown system of commercial compe
tition be not hurrying the laborer towards the lowest rate of
wages, capable of sustaining life, too rapidly to be overtaken,
except in individual cases, even by a prudential check to
population. I do not, then, expect political wonders from my
little work. Economy in living is, like the parental foresight
of which I speak, in itself an excellent thing, and ought
to be recommended to all ; but he who expects, by the one
recommendation or the other, to eradicate the ills of poverty,
expects an effect from inadequate causes.
The root
of the evil lies far deeper than this ; and its remedy must be
of a more radical nature. This is not the place, however,
to enter on such a discussion. The great importance of the
present work I conceive to lie more in its m«raZ and social,
than in its political, bearings. It is addressed to each
individual, rather as the member of a family, than the
citizen of a state.
Enough has been said, probably, in this chapter, to deter
mine the question, whether it is, or is not, desirable, in a
political point of view, that some check to population be
sought and disclosed—some “moral restraint” that shall
not, like vice and misery, be demoralizing, nor, like late
marriages, be ascetic and immacticable.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
CHAPTER V.
THE QUESTION CONSIDERED IN ITS SOCIAL BEARINGS.
This is by far the most important branch of the question.
The evils caused by an absolute overstocking; of the world, if
inevitable, are distant; and an abstract statement of the sub
ject, however unanswerable, does not come home to the
mind with the force of detailed reality.
What would be the probable effect, in social life, if man
kind obtained and exercised a control over the instinct of
reproduction?
My settled conviction is—and I am prepared to defend
it—that the effect would be salutary, moral, civilising; that
it would prevent many crimes and more unhappiness; that
it would lessen intemperance and profligacy ; that it would
polish the manners and improve the moral feelings; that it
would alleviate the burden of the poor, and the cares of the
rich ; that it would most essentially benefit the rising gene
ration, by enabling parents generally more carefully to
educate, and more comfortably to provide for, their offspring.
I proceed to substantiate these positions.
And first, let us look solely to the situation of married
persons. Is it not notorious, that their families often
increase beyond what a regard for the young beings
coming into the world, or the happiness of those who give
them birth, would dictate ? In how many instances does the
hard-working father, and more especially the mother, of a
poor family, remain slaves throughout their lives, tugging at
the oar of incessant labor, toiling to live, and living only
to die; when, if their offspring had been limited to two or
three, they might have enjoyed comfort and comparative
affluence! How often is the health of the mother, giving
birth every year, perchance, to an infant—happy, if it be not
twins '.—and compelled to toil on, even at those times when
nature imperiously calls for some relief from daily drudgery
—how often is the mother’s comfort, health, nay, her life,
thus sacrificed ! Or, when care and toil have weighed down
the spirit, and at last broken the health of the father, how
often is the widow left, unable, with the most virtuous inten
tions, to save her fatherless offspring from becoming de
graded objects of charity, or profligate votaries of vice !
Fathers and mothers! not you who have your nursery and
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
27
your nursery maids, and who ieave your children at home
to frequent the crowded rout, or to glitter in the hot ball■room ; but you, by the labor of whose hands your children
are to live, and who, as you count their rising numbers, sigh
ttotoink how soon sickness or misfortune may lessen those
wages, which are now but just sufficient to afford them
bread—fathers and mothers in humble life ! to you my
argument comes home, with the force of reality. Others may
impugn—may ridicule it. By bitter experience you know
and feel its truth.
It will be said, that the state ought to provide for the effi
cient guardianship and education of all the children of the
land. No one is less inclined to deny the position than I.
But it does not provide for these. And if it did, a periou
must come at last, when even such an act of justice would
be no relief from the evils of over-population.
,
Yet this is not all. Every physician knows, that there are
many women so constituted that they cannot give birth to
healthy—sometimes not to living children. Is it desirable—
is it moral, that such women should become pregnant? Yet
this is continually the case, the warnings of physicians to the
contrary notwithstanding. Others there are, who ought never
to become parents; because, in so doing, they transmit to
their offspring grievous hereditary diseases; perhaps that
worst of diseases, insanity. Yet they will not lead a life
of celibacy. They marry. They become parents, and the
world suffers by it. That a human being qsould give
birth to a child, knowing that he transmits to it hereditary,
disease, is, in my opinion, an immorality. But it is a folly
to expect that we can ever induce all such persons to live the
lives of Shakers. Nor is it necessary. All that duty requires
of them is, to refrain from becoming parents. Who can
estimate the beneficial effect which rational, moral restraint
may thus have on the physical improvement of our race,
throughout future ages ! Were such virtue as this generally
cultivated, how soon might the very seeds of disease die out
among us, instead of bearing, as now, their poison-fruit,
from generation to generation! and how far might human
beings, in succeeding times, surpass their forefathers in
health, in strength and in beauty!
This view of the subject is, to the physiologist, to the phi
losopher, to every friend of human improvement, a most
interesting one, “ So long’’’ to use the words of an eloquent,
tocturer, now in this city, “ as the tainted stream is unhesi*
'* Mr. Graham, whose excellent discourses on temperance have excited!
�28
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
tatingly transmitted through the channel of nature, from
parent to offspring, so long will the text be verified which
‘ visits the sins of the fathers on the children, even to the
third and fourth generations? ” And so long, I would add,
will mankind (wise and successful whenever there is question
of improving the animal races) be blind in perceiving, and
listless in securing, that far nobler object, the physical, and
thereby (in a measure) the mental and moral improvement
of our own.
1 may seem an enthusiast—but so let me seem then,—when
I express my conviction, that there is not greater physical
disparity between the dullest, shaggiest race of dwarf draught
horses, and the fiery-spirited and silken-haired Arabian, than
'between man degenerate as he is, and man perfected as he
might be : and though mental cultivation in this counts for
much, yet organic melioration is an influential—an indis
pensable accsseary.
But, apart from these latter considerations, is it not most
plainly, clearly, incontrovertibly desirable, that parents should
have the power to limit their offspring, whether they choose
*
to exercise it or not? Who can lose by their having this
power? and how many mrr/y gain ! may gain competency for
themselves, and the opportunity carefully to educate and
provide for their children! How many may escape the jar
rings, the quarrels, the disorder, the anxiety, which an over
grown family too often causes in the domestic circle !
It sometimes happens that individual instances come home
to the feelings with greater force than any general reasoning.
I shall, in this place, adduce one which came immediately
under my cognizance.
In June, 1829, I received from an elderly gentleman of
the first respectability, occupying a public situation in one of
the western states, a letter, requesting to know whether I
could afford any information or advice in a case which greatly
interested him, and which regarded a young woman for
whom he had ever experienced the sentiments of a father.
so much interest, and made so many converts, lately, in New York,
Philadelphia, and other cities of the Union.
* It may possibly be argued, that all married persons have this power
already ; seeing that they are no more obliged to become parents than the
unmarried ; they may live as the brethren and sisters among the Shakers
do. But this Shaker remedy is, as every one knows, utterly impi acticable
as a general rule; and it would chill and embitter domestic life, even if
’t were practicable.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
29
In explanation of the circumstances he enclosed me a copy
of a letter which she had just written to him, and which
I here transcribe verbatim. A letter more touching from
its simplicity, or more strikingly illustrative of the unfortunate
situation in which not one, but thousands, in married life,
find themselves placed, I have never read.
“ Dear Sir,
L * * * Kentucky, May 3, 1829.
“ The friendship which has existed between you and my
father, ever since I can remember; the unaffected kindness
you used to express towards me when you resided in our
neighbourhood, during my childhood ; the lively solicitude
you have always seemed to feel for my welfare, and your
benevolent and liberal character, induce meto lay before you,
in a few words, my critical situation, and ask for your kind
advice.
“ It is my lot to be united in wedlock to a young mechanic
of industrious habits, good dispositions, pleasing manners,
and agreeable features, excessively fond of our children and
of me; in short, eminently well qualified to render him
self and family and all around him happy, were it not for the
besetting sin of drunkenness. About once in every three or
four weeks, if he meet, either accidentally, or purposely, with
some of his friends, of whom,either real or pretended, his good
nature and liberality procure him many, he is sure to get in
toxicated, so as to lose his reason ; and, when thus beside
himself, he trades and makes foolish bargains, so much to
his disadvantage, that he has almost reduced himself and
family to beggary, being no longer able to keep a shop of his
own, but obliged to work journey work.
“We have not been married quite four years, and have
already given being to three dear little ones. Under present
circumstances what can I expect will be their fate and mine?
I shudder at the prospect before me. With my excellent con
stitution and industry, and the labor of my husband, I feel
able to bring up these three little cherubs in decency, were
I to have no more : but when I seriously consider my situa
tion, I can see no other alternative left for me, than to tear
myself away from the man who, though addicted to occasional
intoxication, would sacrifice his life for my sake; and for
whom, contrary to my father’s will, I successively refused the '
hand and wealth of a lawyer and of a preacher; or continue
to witness his degradation, and bring into existence,in all pro
bability, a numerous family of helpless and destitute children, .
who, on account of poverty, must inevitably be doomed to a life of ignorance, and consequent vice and misery.
�30
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
“ The dreadful sentence pronounced against me by my father
for my disobedience, forbids me applying to him, either for
advice or anything else. Aly husband being somewhat
sceptical, my father attributes Ins intemperance to his infi
delity ; though my brother, as you know, being a member of
the same church with my father, is, nevertheless, though he
does not fool away his property, more of a drunkard than my
husband, and ranks among the faithful. You will therefore
plainly see, that for these and other reasons, 1 stand the more .
in need of your friendly advice; and I do hope, and believe ■■
you will give me such advice and counsel as you would to
your own daughter, had you one in the same predicament that
I am. In so doing, you will add new claims to the gratitude
of your friend,
M. W.”
Need I add one word of comment on such a case as this?
Every one must be touched with the amiable feeling and
good sense that pervade the letter. Every rational being,
surely, must admit, that the power of preventing, without
injury or sacrifice, the increase of a family, under such cir
cumstances, is a public benefit and a private blessing.
Will it be asserted—and I know no other even plausible re
ply to these facts and arguments—will it be asserted, that the
thing is, in itself, immoral or unseemly? I deny it; and I point
to France, in justification of my denial. Where will you find,
on the face of the globe, a more polished, or more civilised
nation than the French, or one more punctiliously alive to any
rudeness, coarseness, or indecorum? You will find none. The
French are scrupulous on these points, to a proverb. Yet,
as every intelligent traveller in France must have remarked,
there is scarcely to be found, among the middle or upper
■classes, (and seldom even among the working classes,) a
large family; seldom more than three or four children. A
French lady of the utmost delicacy and respectability will, in
common conversation, say as simply—(ay, and as innocently,
whatever the self-righteous prude may aver to the contrary)
as she would proffer any common remark about the weather:
“ I have three children ; my husband and I think that is as
many as we can do justice to, and I do not intend to have
any more.”*
I have stated notorious facts, facts which no traveller who
has visited Paris, and been admitted to the domestic life of
* Will our sensitive fine ladies blush at the plain good sense and sim
plicity of such an observation ? Let me tell them, the indelicacy is in
their own minds, not in the words of the French mother.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
31
its inhabitants, will attempt to deny. However heterodox,
then, my view of the subject may be in this country, 1 am
supported in it by the opinion and the practice of one of the
most refined and most socially cultivated nations in the
world.
Will it still be argued, that the practice, if not coarse, is
immoral ? Again I appeal to France. I appeal to the details
of the late glorious revolution—to the innumerable instances
of moderation, of courage, of honesty, of disinterestedness, of
generosity, of magnanimity, displayed on the memorable
“ three days,” and ever since; and I challenge comparison
between the national character of modern France for virtue,
as well as politeness, and that of any other nation under
heaven.
It is evident, then, that, to married persons, the power of
limiting their offspring to their circumstances is most desir
able. It may often promote the harmony, peace, and com
fort of families ; sometimes it may save from bankruptcy and
ruin, and sometimes it may rescue the mother from premature
death. In no case can it, by possibility, be worse than super
fluous. In no case can it be mischievous.
If the moral feelings were carefully cultivated, if we were
taught to consult, in every thing, rather the welfare of those
we love than our own, how strongly would these arguments
be felt! No man ought even to desire that a woman should
become the mother of his children, unless it was her express
wish, and unless he knew it to be for her welfare, that she
should. Her feelings, her interests, should be for him in this
matter an imperative law. She it is who bears the burden,
and therefore with her also should the decision rest. Surely
it may well be a question whether it be desirable, or whether
any man ought to ask, that the whole life of an intellectual,!
cultivated woman, should be spent in bearing a family of/
twelve or fifteen children ; to the ruin, perhaps, of her con
stitution, if not to the overstocking of the world. No man
ought to require or expect it.
Shall I be told, that this is the very romance of morality?
Alas ! that what ought to be a matter of every day practice—
a common-place exercise of the duties and charities of life,
■* —a bounden duty—an instance of domestic courtesy too
universal either to excite remark orto merit commendation—
alas ! that a virtue so humble that its absence ought to be re
proached as a crime, should, to our selfish perceptions, seem
iu.t a fastidious refinement, or a fanciful supererogation !
But I pass from the case of married persons to that of
�32
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
young men and women who have not yet formed a matrirno.nial connexion.
In the present state of the world, when public opinion
stamps with opprobrium every sexual connexion which has
not received the orthodox sanction of an oath, almost all
young persons, on reaching the age of maturity, desire to
marry. The heart must be very cold, or very isolated, that
does not find some object on which to bestow its affections.
Early marriages would be almost universal, did not pruden
tial considerations interfere. The young man thinks, “ I
must not marry yet. I cannot support a family. I must
make money first, and think of a matrimonial settlement
afterwards.”
And so he sets about making money, fully and sincerely
resolved, in a few years, to share it with her whom he now
loves. But passions are strong, and temptations great.
Curiosity, perhaps, introduces him into the company of
those poor creatures whom society first reduces to a depen
dence on the most miserable of mercenary trades, and then
curses for being- what she has made them. There his health
and his moral feelings alike make shipwreck. The affections
he had thought to treasure up for their first object, are chil
led by dissipation and blunted by excess, He scarcely re
tains a passion but avarice. Years pass on—years of profli
gacy and speculation—and his first wish is accomplished;
his fortune is made. Where now are the feelings and re
solves of his youth ?
Like the dew on the mountain,
Like the foam on the river,
Like the bubble on the fountain,
They are gone—and for ever I
He is a man of pleasure—a man of the world. He laughs
at the romance of his youth, and marries a fortune. If
gaudy equipages and gay parties confer happiness, he is
happy. But if these be only the sunshine on the stormy
ocean below, he is a victim to that system of morality, which
forbids a reputable connexion until the period when provi
sion has been made for a large, expected family. Had he
married the first object of his choice, and simply delayed
becoming a father until his prospects seemed to warrant it,
how different might have been his lot? Until men and wo
men are absolved from the fear of becoming parents, except
when they themselves desire it, they will continue to form
�33
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
mercenary and demoralizing connexions, and seek in dissi
pation the happiness they might have found in domestic life.
I know that this, however common, is not a universal case.
Sometimes the heavy responsibilities of a family are incurred,
at all risks; and who shall say how often a life of unremit
ting toil and poverty is the consequence ? Sometimes—if even
rarely—the young mind does hold to its first resolves. The
youth plods through years of cold celibacy and solitary
anxiety : happy, if before the best hours of life are gone and
its warmest feelings withered, he may return to claim the
reward of his forbearance and his industry. But even in
this comparatively happy case, shall we count for nothing the
years of ascetical sacrifice at which after-happiness is pur
chased ? The days of youth are not too many, nor its affec
tions too lasting. We may, indeed, if a great object require
it, sacrifice the one and mortify the other. But is this in
itself, desirable ? Does not wisdom tell us, that such sacri
fice is a dead loss—to the warm-hearted often a grievous one?
Does not wisdom bid us temperately enjoy the spring-time
of life, “ while the evil days come not, nor the years draw
nigh when we shall say, ‘ We have no pleasure in them
Let us say, then, if we will, that the youth who thus sacri
fices the present for the future, chooses wisely between two
evils, profligacy and asceticism. This is true. But let us not
imagine the lesser evil to be a good. It is not good for man
to be aione. It is for no man’s or woman’s happiness or benefit, that they should be condemned to Shakerism. It is a vio
lence done to the feelings, and an injury to the character. A
life of rigid celibacy, though greatly preferable to a life of
dissipation, is yet fraught with many evils. Peevishness,
restlessness, vague longings, and instability of character, are
among the least of these. The ipind is unsettled, and the
judgment warped. Even the very instinct which is thus
mortified, assumes an undue importance, and occupies a por
tion of the thoughts, which does not, of right or nature, belong
to it; and which, during a life of satisfied affection, it would
not obtain.
I speak not now of extreme cases, where solitary vice or
*
* For a vice so unnatural as onanism there could be no tempta*
lion, and therefore no existence, were not men and women unnaturally
and mischievously situated. It first appeared, probably, in monasteries
and convents ; and has been perpetuated by the more or less antisocial and demoralizing relation in which the sexes stand to each
ether,inalmost all countries. In estimating the consequences of the
�34
1
‘
moral physiology.
disease, or even insanity, lias been tbe result of asceftca.
mortification. I speak of every-day cases ; and I am well
convinced, that, (however wise it often is, in the present state
of the world, to select and adhere to this alternative,) yet no
man or woman can live the life of a conscientious Shaker,
without suffering, more or less, physically, mentally, and
morally. This is the more to be regretted, because the very
noblest portion of our species—the good, the pure, the highminded, and the kind-hearted—are the chief victims.
Thus, ^nasmuc’1 as the scruple of incurring heavy respon
sibilities deters from forming moral connexions, and en
courages intemperance and prostitution, the knowledge
which enables man to limit his offspring, would, in the pre
sent state of things, save much unhappiness, and prevent
many crimes. Young persons sincerely attached to each other,
and who might wish to marry, might marry early; merely
resolving not to become parents until prudence permitted it.
The young man, instead of solitary toil or vulgar dissipation,
would enjoy the society and the assistance of her he had
chosen as his companion ; and the best years of life, whose
pleasures never return, would not be squandered in riot
or lost through mortification.
If, in virtue of these recommendations, early marriages
became common, and parents were accustomed to limit the
number of their offspring, they would have the best chance
of forming their children’s characters, watching their pro
gress, even to manhood, and seeing them settled in the
world ; instead of leaving them, while young and inexpe
rienced, as they who become parents at a late age must
expect to do, to the mercy of fortune and the guidance of
strangers.
My readers will remark, that all the arguments I have
hitherto employed, apply strictly to the present order of
things, and the present laws and system of marriage. No
one, therefore, need be a moral heretic on this subject, to
present false situation of society, we must set down to the black account
the wretched, wretched consequences, (terminating not unfrequently in
incurable insanity,) of this vice, the preposterous offspring of modern
civilization. Physicians say that onanism at present prevails, to a
lamentable extent, both in this country and England. If the recorts
*
mendations contained in this little treatise were generally followed, it
would probably disappear in a single generation.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY,
35
admit and approve them. The marriage laws mi ht all re
main for ever as they are ; and yet a moral check to popula
tion would be beneficent and important.
But there are other cases, it will be said, in which the
knowledge of such a check would be mischievous. If young
women, it will be argued, were absolved from the fear of
consequences, they would rarely preserve their chastity.
Unlegalized connexions would be common and seldom de
tected. Seduction would be facilitated. Let us carefully
i examine this argument.
I fully agree with that most amiable of moral heretics,
Shelley, that “ Seduction, which term could have no mean
ing in a rational society, has now a most tremendous one.”
It matters not. how artificial the penalty which society has
chosen to affix to a breach of her capricious decrees. Society
has the power in her own hands; and that moral Shylock,
Public Opinion, enforces the penalty, even though it cost
the life of the victim. The consequences, then, to the poor
sufferer, whose offence is but an error of judgment or a weak
ness of the heart, are the same as if her imprudence were
indeed a crime of the blackest dye. And his conduct who,
for a momentary, selfish gratification, will deliberately entail
a life of wretchedness on one whose chief fault, perhaps, was
her misplaced confidence in a hypocrite, is not one whit
excused by the folly and injustice of the sentence.j- Some
poet says,
“ The man. who lays his hand upon a woman
Save in the way of kindness, is a wretch
Whom ’twere gross flattery to call a coward.”
How, then, shall we regard him who makes it a trade to
win a woman’s gentle affections, betray her generous confi
dence, and then, when the consequences become apparent,
abandon her to dependence, and the scorn of a cold, a selfrighteous and a wicked world; a world which will forgive
* Letter of Percy Bysshe Shelley, of December 5, 1818.
+ Every reflecting mind will distinguish between the unreasoning—
sometimes even generous imprudence of youthful passion, and the calcu
lating selfishness of the matured and heartless libertine. It is a melant^ich®ly truth, that pseudo-civilization produces thousands of seducers by
profession, who, while daily calling the heavens to witness their eternal
affections, have no affection for any thing on earth but their own profli
gate Reives. It is to characters so utterly worthless as these that my
t&scrvations apply.
a
�36
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
any thing but rebellion against its tyranny, and in whose
eyes it seems the greatest of crimes to be unsuspecting and
warm-hearted !
And, let me ask, what is it gives to the arts of seduction
thier sting, and stamps to the world its victim ? Why is it,
that the man goes free and enters society again, almost
courted and applauded ; while the woman is a mark for the
finger of reproach, and a butt for the tongue of scandal ? Is
it not chiefly because she bears about her the mark of what
is called her disgrace ? She becomes a mother ; and society
has something tangible against which to direct its anathe
mas. Mine-tenths, at least, of the misery and ruin which are
caused by seduction, even in the present state of public
opinion, result from cases of pregnancy. Perhaps the unfeel
ing selfishness of him who fears to become a father, adminis
ters some noxious drug to procure abortion ; perhaps—
for even such scenes our courts of justice disclose!—perhaps
the frenzy of the wretched mother takes the life of her in
fant, or seeks in suicide the consummation of her wrongs
and her woes ! Or, if the little being live, the dove in the
falcon’s claws is not more certain of death than we may be,
that society will visit, with its bitterest scoff’s and reproaches,
the bruised spirit of the mother and the unconscious inno
cence of the child.
If, then, we cannot do all, shall we neglect a part? If we
cannot prevent every misery which man’s selfishness and the
world’s cruelty" entail on a sex, which it ought to be our pride
and honor to cherish and defend; let us prevent as many as
we can. If we cannot persuade society to revoke its unmanly
and unchristian * persecution of those who are often the best
and gentlest of its members—let us, at the least, give to wo
man what defence we may, against its violence.
I appeal to any father, trembling for the reputation of his
child, whether, if she were induced to form an unlegalised
connexion, her pregnancy would not be a frightful aggrava
tion? I appeal to him, whether any innocent preventive
which shall save her from a situation that must soon disclose
all to the world, would not be an act of mercy, of charity, of
philanthropy—whether it might not save him from despair,
and her from ruin? The fastidious conformist may frow£
upon the question, but to the father it comes home; and.,
• Jesus said unto her,“ Neither do I condemn thee.”—viii. 11
�moral physiology.
37
whatever his lips may say, his heart will acknowledge the
soundness and the force of the argument it conveys.
*
It may be, that some sticklers for orthodox morality will
still demur to the positions I defend. They will perhaps tell
me, as the Committee of a certain Society in this city lately
did, that the power of preventing conceptions “ holds out
inducements and facilities for the prostitution of their
daughters, their sisters, and their wives.
* What is the actual state of society in Great Britain, and even in thii
republic, that pseudo-civilization, in her superlative delicacy, should so
fastidiously scruple to speak of or to sanction, a simple, moral, effectual
check to population? Are her sons all chaste and temperate, and her
daughters all passionless and pure ? I might disclose, if I would, in this
very city of New York—and in our neighbor city of Philadelphia—
scenes and practices that have come to light from time to time, and that
would furnish no very favorable answer to the question. I might ask,
whether all the houses of assignation in these two cities are frequented
b y the known profligate alone ? or, whether some of the most outwardly
respectable fathers—ay, mothers of families—have not been found in
resorts frequented and supported only by “ good society’'’ like them
selves ?
As regards Great Britain, I might quote the evidence delivered before
a “ Committee of the House of Commons, on Laborers’ Wages,” by
Mr. Henry Drummond, a banker, magistrate, and large land-owner, in
the county of Surry, in which the following question and answer occur
Q. “ What is the practice you allude to of forcing marriages ?” A. “ I
believe nothing is more erroneous than the assertion, that the poor laws
tend to imprudent marriages; I never knew an instance of a girl being
married until she was with child, nor ever knew of a marriage taking
place throagh a calculation for future support.” Mr. Drummond’s
assertions were confirmed by other equally respectable witnesses; and
from what I have myself learnt in conversation with some of the chief
manufacturers of England, I am convinced, that the statement, as regards
the working population in the chief manufacturing districts, is scarcely
exaggerated.
I might go on to state, that the spot on which the Foundling Hospital
in Dublin now stands, formerly went by the name of “ Murderer’s
Lane,” from the number of ch-’’d murders that were perpetrated in the
vicinity.
I might adduce the testimony of respectable witnesses in proof, that,
even among the married, the blighting effects of ergot are not unfrequently incurred; by those very persons, probably, who, in public,
would think fit to be terribly shocked at this little book.
But why multiply proofs? The records of every court of justice, nay,
the tittle tattle of every fashionable drawing room, sufficiently marks the
leal character of this prudish and p'narisaical world.of ours.
t See Letter of the Gommittee of the Typographical Socletv ‘ib Robert
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
38
Truly, but they pay their wives, their sisters, and their
daughters, a poor compliment!
Is, then, this vaunted
chastity a mere thing of circumstance and occasion ? Is
there but the difference of opportunity between it and prosti
tution ? Would their wives, their sisters, and their daugh
ters, if once absolved from the fear of offspring, become
prostitutes—sell their embraces for gold, and descend to a
level with the most degraded? In truth, they slander their
own kindred; they libel their own wives, sisters, and
daughters. If they spoke truth—if fear were indeed the only
safeguard of their relatives’ chastity, little value should I
place on a virtue like that I and small would I esteem his
offence, who should attempt or seduce it.
*
Dale Owen, published in the Commercial Advertiser of the 29th of
September, and copied into the Free Enquirer of the 9th of Oqfepber,
1830.
For a statement of the circumstances connected with that letter, and
which induced me, at this time, to write and publish the present treatise,
see Preface to the New York edition.
* I should like to hear these gentlemen explain, according to what
principle they imagine the chastity of their wives to grow out of a fear of
offspring; so that, if released from such fear, prostitution would follow.
I can readily comprehend that the unmarried may be supposed careful
to avoid that situation to which no legal cause can be assigned ; but a
wife must be especially dull, if she cannot assign, in all cases, a legal
cause ; and a husband must be especially sagacious, if he can tell whe
ther the true cause be assigned or not. This safeguard to married
chastity, therefore, to which the gentlemen of the Typographical Com
mittee seem to look with so implicit a confidence, is a mere broken reed ;
and has been so ever since the days of Bathsheba.
Yet conjugal chastity is that which is especially valued. The incon
stancy of a wife commonly cuts much deeper than the dishonor of a
sister. In that case, then, which the world usually considers of the
highest importance, the fear of offspring imposes no check whatever. It
cannot make one iota of difference whether a married woman be knowing
in physiology or not; except perhaps, indeed, to the husbands advan
tage ; in cases where the wife’s conscience induces her at least to guard
against the possibility of burthening her legal lord with the care and sup
port of children that are not his. Constancy, where it actually exists, is
the offspring of something more efficacious than ignorance. And if in
the wife’s case, men must and do trust to something else, why not in all
other cases, where constraint may be considered desirable ? Shall men
trust in the greater, and fear to trust in the less? Whatever any one
may choose to assert regarding his relatives’ secret inclinations to pro
fligacy, these arguments may convince him, that if he have any safeguard
at present, a perusal of Moral Physiology will not destroy it.
’Tis strange that men, by way of suborning an argument, should be
�M01UL PHYSIOLOGY.
39
That chastity which is worth preserving is not Ihc chastity
that owes its birth to fear and ignorance. If to enlighten a
woman regarding a simple physiological fact will make her
a prostitute, she must be especially predisposed to profli' gacy. But it is a libel on the sex. Few, indeed, there are,
, who would continue so miserable and degrading a calling could they escape from it. For one prostitute that is made
by inclination, ten are made by necessity. Reform the laws
—equalize the comforts of society, and you need withhold no
knowledge from your wives and daughters. It is want, not
knowledge, that leads to prostitution.
For myself, I would withhold from no sister, or daughter,
or wife of mine, any ascertained fact whatever. It should
be to me a duty and a pleasure to communicate to them all
I knew myself: and I should hold it an insult to their under
standings and their hearts to imagine, that their virtue would
diminish as their knowledge increased. Would we but trust
human nature, instead of continually suspecting it, and
guarding it by bolts and bars, and thinking to make it very
chaste by keeping it very ignorant, what a different world
we should have of it! The virtue of ignorance is a sickly
plant, ever exposed to the caterpillar of corruption, liable to
be scorched and blasted even by the free light of heaven ; of
precarious growth ; and even if at last artificially matured, of
little or no real value.
I know that parents often think it right and proper to
withhold from their children, especially from their daughters,
facts the most influential on their future lives, and the know
ledge of which is essential to every man and woman’s well
being. Such a course has ever appeared to me ill-judged
and productive of very injurious effects. A girl is surely no
whit tlie better for believing, until her marriage night, that
■ children are found among the cabbage leaves in the garden
The imagination is excited, the curiosity kept continually on
the stretch ; and that which, if simply explained, would have
been recollected only as any other physiological phenome
non, assumes alf the rank and importance and engrossing
interest of a mystery. Nay, I am well convinced, that mere
Curiosity has often led ignorant young people into situations,
from which a little more confidence and openness on the part
of their parents or guardians, would have effectually secured
| them.
willing thus to vilify their relatives’ character and motives, without first
carefully examining whether any thing was gained to theii cause, after
all, by the ’'i'Pic-uion
�•A
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
In the monkish days of mental darkness, when it was
taught and believed that all the imaginations and all the
thoughts of man are only evil continually, when it was
deemed right and proper to secure the submission of the
mass by withholding from them the knowledge even how to
read and write—in those days, it was all very well to shut up
the physiological page, and tell us, that on the day we read
therein we should surely die. But those times are past. In
this nineteenth century men and women read, think, discuss,
inquire, judge for themselves. If, in these latter days, there
is to be virtue at all, she must be the offspring of knowledge
and of free inquiry, not of ignorance and mystery. We
cannot prevent the spread of any real knowledge, even if we
would ; we ought not, even if we could.
This book will make its way through the whole United
States. Curiosity and the notoriety which has already been
given to the subject, will suffice at first to obtain for it cir
culation. The practical importance of the subject it treats
will do the rest. It needed but some one to start the stone;
its own momentum will suffice to carry it forward.
But, if we could prevent the circulation of truth, why
should we? We are not afraid of it ourselves. No man
thinks his morality will suffer by it. Each feels certain that
bis virtue can stand any degree of knowledge. And is it not
the height of egregious presumption in each to imagine that
his neighbor is so much weaker than himself, and requires a
bandage which he can do without? Most of all, it is pre
sumptuous to suppose, that that knowledge which the man
of the world can bear with impunity, will corrupt the young
and lhe pure-hearted. It is the sullied conscience only that
suggests such fears. Trust youth and innocence. Speak
to them openly. Show them that yot- respect them, by
treating them with confidence; and they will quickly learn
to respect and to govern themselves. Enlist their pride
in your behalf; and you will soon see them make it their
boast and their highest pleasure to merit your confidence.
But watch them, and show your suspicion of them but once,
and you are the jailor, who will keep his prisoners just as
long as bars and bolts shall prevent their escape. The
world was never made for a prison-house; it is too large
and ill-guarded : nor were parents ever intended for gaol
keepers ; their very affections unfit them for the task.
There is no more beautiful sight upon earth, than a family
among whom there are no secrets and no reserves ; where
the young people confide every thing to their elder friends—
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY
for such to them arc their parents—and whine the parents
trust every thing to their children; where each thought is
communicated as freely as it arises; and all knowledge
given as simply as it is received. If the world contain a
prototype of That Paradise, where nature is said to have
known no sin or impropriety, it is such a family. And if •'
there be a serpent that can poison the innocence of its in- 5
mates, that serpent is Suspicion,
I ask no greater pleasure than thus to be the guardian and
companion of young beings whose innocence shall speak to
me as unreservedly as it thinks to itself; of young beings
who shall never imagine that there is guilt in their thoughts,
or sin in their confidence ; and to whom, in return, I may
impart every important and useful «fact that is known to
myself. Their virtue should be of that hardy growth, which
all facts tend to nourish and strengthen.
I put it to my readers, whether such a view of human
nature, and such a mode of treating it, be not in accordance
with the noblest feelings of their hearts. I put it to them,
whether they have not felt themselves encouraged, improved,
strengthened in every virtuous resolution, when they were
generously trusted, and whether they have not felt abashed
and degraded when they were suspiciously watched, and
spied after, and kept in ignorance. If they find such feelings
in their own hearts, let them not self-righteously imagine,
that they only can be won by generosity, or that the nature
of their fellow-creatures is different from their own.
There are other considerations connected with this subject,
which farther attest the social advantages of the control I
advocate. Human affections are mutable, and the sincerest
of mortal resolutions may change.
*
Every day furnishes
instances of alienations, and of separattons; sometimes
almost before the honey-moon is well expired. In such
cases of unsuitability, it cannot be considered desirable
that there should be offspring; and the power of refraining
from becoming parents until intimacy had, in a measure,
established the likelihood of permanent harmony of view
and feelings, will be confessed to be advantageous.
The limits which my numerous avocations prescribe to
* Le premier serment que se firent deux etres de chair, se fut au
ied d’un rocher, qui tombait en poussiere; ils attesterent de leur conpance un ciel qui n’est pas un instant le meme: tout passait en eux, et
stutour d’eux ; et ils croyaient leurs coeurs affranchis de vicissitudes. O
afaiise a’, touiours enfans! —Diderot Jacques et son Maitre.
t
�42
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
this little treatise, permit me not to meet every argument in
detail, which ingenuity or prejudice might put forward. If
the world were not actually afraid to think freely or to listen
io the suggestions of common sense, three fourths of what
has already been said would be superfluous for most of
;
*
the arguments employed would occur spontaneously to any
rational being. But the mass of mankind have still, in a
measure, every thing to learn on this and other moral sub
jects. The world seems to me much to resemble a company
of gourmands, who sit down to a plentiful repast, first very
punctiliously saying grace over it; and then, under sanction
of the priest’s blessing, think to gorge themselves with im
punity ; as conceiving, that gluttony after grace is no sin.
So it is with popular customs and popular morality. Every
thing is permitted, if external forms be but respected. Le
gal roguery is no crime, and ceremony-sanctioned excess no
profligacy. The substance is sacrificed to the form, the
virtue to the outward observance. The world troubles its
head little about whether a man be honest or dishonest, so
he knows how to avoid the penitentiary and escape the
gallows. In like manner, the world seldom thinks it worth
while to enquire whether a man be temperate or intemperate,
prudent or thoughtless. It takes especial care to inform
itself whether in all things he conforms to orthodox require
ments ; and, if he does, all is right. Thus men too often
learn to consider an oath an absolution from all subsequent
decencies and duties, and a full release from all after re
sponsibilities. If a husband maltreat his wife,, the offence is
venal: for he premised it by making her, at the altar, an
honest vfoman.” If a married father neglect his children,,
it is a trifle ; for grace was regularly said, before they were
born.
So true is this, that if some heterodox moralist were to
throw out the idea, that many of the rudenesses and jarrings,
and much of the indifference and carelessness of each others’
feelings that are exhibited in married life, might be traced to
the almost universal custom (in this country, though not in
France) of man and wife continually occupying the same
bed—if he put it to us whether such a forced and too fre
quent familiarity were not calculated to lessen the charms
and pleasures, and diminish the respectful regard and defer
ence, which ought ever to characterize the intercourse or
□uman beings—if, I say, some heretical preferrer of things
Jo forms were to light upon and express some such unlucky
�43
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
ideaas this, ten to one the married portion of the community
would fall upon him without mercy, as an impertinent inter
meddler in their most legitimate rights and prerogatives.
With such a world as this, it is a difficult matter to reason.
After listening to all I have said, it may perhaps cut me
short by reminding me, that nature herself declares it to be
right and proper, that we should reproduce our species with
out calculation or restraint. I will ask, in reply, whether
nature also declares it to be right and proper, that when the
thermometer is at 96, we should drink greedily of cold
water, and drop down dead in the streets ? Let the world
be told, that if nature gave us our passions and propensities,
she gave us also the power wisely to control them; and that,
when we hesitate to exercise that power, we descend to a
level with the brute creation, and become the sport of for
tune—the mere slaves of circumstance.
*
To one other argument it were not, perhaps, worth while
to advert, but that it has been already speciously used to
excite popular prejudice. It has been said, that to recom
mend to mankind prudential restraint in cases where chil
dren cannot be provided for, is an insult to the poor man;
since all ought to be so circumstanced that they might pro
vide amply for the largest family. Most assuredly all ought
to be so circumstanced ; but all are not. And there would
be just as much propriety in bidding a poor man go and take
by force a piece of Saxony broadcloth from his neighbor’s
store, because he ought to be able to purchase it, as to en
courage him to go on producing children, because he ought
to have wherewithal to support them. Let us exert every
nerve to correct the injustice and arrest the misery that results
from a vicious order of things; but, until we have done so,
let us not, for humanity’s sake, madly recommend that which
grievously aggravates the evil; which increases the burden
on the present generation, and threatens with neglect and
Ignorance the next.
* Some German poet, whose name has escaped me, says,
“ Tapfer ist der Lowensieger,
Tapfer ist der Weltbezwinger,
.
Tapferer, wer sich selbst bezwang!”
u
<f Brave is the lion victor,
Brave the conqueror of a world,
Braver he who controls himself!”
It ia a noble sentiment, and very appropriate to the present discussion-
�44
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
And now, let my readers pause. Let them review the va
rious arguments I have placed before them. Let them reflect
how intimately the instinct of which I treat is connected
with the social welfare of society. Let them bear in mind,
that just in proportion to its social influence, is it important
that we should know how to control and govern it; that,
when we oblain such control, we may save ourselves, and
what we ought to prize much more highly, may save our com
panions and our offspring, from suffering or misery ; that, by
such knowledge, the young may form virtuous connexions,
instead of becoming profligate or ascetics; that, by it, early
marriage is deprived of its heaviest, consequences, and seduc
tion of its sharpest sting; that, by it, man may be saved from
moral ruin, and woman from desolating dishonor: that by it
the first pure affections may be soothed and satisfied, instead
of being thwarted or destroyed—let them call to mind all
this, and then let them say, whether the possession of such
control be not a blessing to man.
,______ _
•
,, ffniUitiia. ot buoni
-id joun«o rroib
<■', H-. rmi-:
CHAPTER VI.
/
THE SUBJECT CONSIDERED IN ITS IMMEDIATE CONNECTION
WITH PHYSIOLOGY.
It now remains, after having spoken of the desirability of
obtaining control over the instinct of reproduction, to speak
of its practicability.
As, in this world, the value of labor is too often estimated
almost in proportion to its inutility; so, in physical science,
contested questions seem to have attracted attention and en
gaged research, almost in the inverse ratio of their practical
importance. We have a hundred learned hypotheses for one
decisive practical experiment. We have many thousands of
volumes written to explain fanciful theories, and scarcely as
many dozens to record ascertained facts.
It is not my intention, in discussing this branch of the sub
ject, to examine the hundred ingenious theories of genera
tion which ancient and modern physiologists have put forth.
I shall not inquire whether the future human being owes its
first existence, as Hippocrates and Galen assert, and Buffon
very ingeniously supports, to the union of two life-giving
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
45
fluids, each a sort of extract of the body of the parent, and!
composed of organic particles similar to the future offspring;
or whether, as Harvey and Haller teach, the embryo reposea
in the ovum until vivified by the seminal fluid, or perhaps
only by the aura seminalis: or whether, according to the
theories of Leuvenhoeck and Boerhaave, the future man
first exists as a spermatic animalcula, for which the ovum,
becomes merely the nourishing receptacle, or whether,, as
the ingenious Andry imagines, a vivifying worm be the more
correct hypothesis; or whether, finally, as Perault will
have it, the embryo beings (too wondex fully organized’
*
to be supposed the production of any mere physical phe
nomenon) must be imagined to come directly from the hands
of the Creator, who has filled the universe with these
little germs, too minute, indeed, to exercise all the ani
mal functions, but still self-existent, and awaiting only
the insinuation of some subtle essence into their microscopic
pores, to come forth as human beings. Still less am I
inclined to follow Hippocrates and Tertullian in their
inquiries, whether the soul is merely introduced into the
foetus, or pre-exists in the semen, and becomes, as it were,
the architect of its future residence, the body; f or to attempt
a refutation of the hypothesis of the metaphysical naturalist, J
who asserts, (and adduces the infinite indivisibility of matter
in support of the assertion,) that the actual germs of the
whole human race, and of all that are yet to be born, existed
in the ovaria of our first mother, Eve. I leave these and fifty
other hypotheses, as ingenious and as useless, to be discussed
by those who seem to make it a point of honor to leave no
fact unexplained by some imagined theory ; and come at
once to positive experience and actual observation.
It is exceedingly to be regretted that mankind did not
spend some small portion of the time and industry which,
has been wasted on theoretical research, in collecting and
collating the actual experience of human beings. But this
task, too difficult for the ignorant, has generally been
thought too simple and common-place for the learned. To
* See “ Histoire de l’Academie des Sciences,” for the year 1679,
page 279.
t Hippocrates positively asserts this latter hypothesis, and is outrage
ous against all sceptics in his theory. In his work on diet, he tells us,
“ Si quis non credat animam, anima misceri, demens est” TertulliaO
tvarmly supports the orthodoxy of this opinion.
| Bonner, I believe.
�46
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
this circumstance, joined to the fact, that it is not thought
fitting or decent for human beings freely to communicate
their personal experience on the important subject now
under consideration—to these causes are attributable the
great and otherwise unaccountable ignorance which so
strangely prevails, even sometimes among medical men, as
to the power which man may possess over the reproductive
instinct. Some physicians deny that man possesses any such
power. And yet, if the thousandth part of the talent and
research had been employed to investigate this momentous
fact, which has been turned to the building up of idle
theories, no commonly intelligent individual would be igno
rant of the truth.
I have taken great pains to ascertain the opinions of the
most enlightened physicians of Great Britain and France on
this subject; (opinions which popular prejudice will not per
mit them to offer publicly in their works ;) and they all con
cur in admitting, what the experience of the French nation
positively proves, that man may have a complete control over
this instinct; and that men and women may, without injury
to health, or violence to the moral feelings, and with very
little diminution of the pleasure which accompanies the grati
fication of the instinct, refrain at will from becoming parents.
It has chanced to me, also, to gain the confidence of several
individuals, who have communicated to me, without reserve,
their own experience ; and all this has been corroborative of
the same opinion.
Thus, though I pretend not to speak positively to the de
tails of a subject, which will then only be fully understood
when men acquire sense enough simply and unreservedly
to discuss it, I may venture to assure my readers, that the
main fact is incontrovertible. I shall adduce such facts in
proof of this as may occur to me in the course of the inves
tigation.
However various and contradictory the different theories
of generation, almost all physiologists are agreed, that the
entrance of the sperm itself (or of some volatile particles
proceeding from it) into the uterus, must precede conception. This it was that probably first suggested the possibi
lity of preventing conception at will.
Among the modes of preventing conception which may
have prevailed in various countries, that which has been
adopted, and is now practised, by the cultivated classes on
the continent of Europe, by the French the Italians and I
!
*
■
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
47
Relieve, by the Germans and Spaniards, consists of complete
Withdrawal, on the part of the man, immediately previous to
emission. This is, in all cases, effectual. It may be objected,
that the practice requires a mental effort and a partial sacri
fice. I reply, that, in France, where men consider this, (as
it ought ever to be considered, when the interests of the other
sex require it,) a point of honor—ally oung men learn to make
the necessary effort; and custom renders it easy and a matter
J of course. As for the sacrifice, shall a trifling (and it is but a
very trifling) diminution of physical enjoyment be suflered
to outweigh the most important considerations connected
with the permanent welfare of those who are the nearest and
dearest to us? Shall it be suffered to outweigh the risk of
incurring heavy and sacred responsibilities, ere we are pre
pared to fulfil them ? Shall it be suffered to outweigh a regard
for the comfort, the well-being—in some cases, the life, of
those whom we profess to love? The most selfish will hesitate
deliberately to reply, in the affirmative, to such questions as
these. A cultivated young Frenchman, instructed as he is,
even from his infancy, carefully to consult, on all occasions,
the wishes, and punctiliously to care for the comfort and wel
fare, of the gentler sex, would learn, almost with incredulity,
that, in other countries, there are men to be found, pretend
ing to cultivation, who were less scrupulously honorable on
this point than himself. You could not offer him a greater
insult than to presuppose the possibility of his forgetting
himself so far as thus to put his own momentary gratification,
for an instant, in competition with the wish or the well-being
of any one to whom he professed regard or affection.
I know it will be argued, that men in the mass are not
I sufficiently moral to adopt this recommendation; because they
will not make any voluntary sacrifice of animal enjoyment,
however trifling. I do not see that. Hundreds of voluntary
* A Frenchman belonging to the cultivated classes, would as soon bear
to be called a coward, as to be accused of causing the pregnancy of a
woman who did not desire it ■, and that, too, whether the matrimonial
’ law had given him legal rights over her person or not. Such an imputa
tion, if substantiated, would shut him out for ever from all decent society ;
and most properly so. It is a perfect barbarity, and ought to be treated
as such.
When we begin to look to genuine morality, instead of empty or onenk fcve forms, these are the principle, of honor we shall implant in our chil
dren’s minds : and then we shall have a world of courtesy and kindneSF^
instead of a scene of legal outrage, or hypocritical profession.
�48
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
sacrifices are daily made to fashion—to public opiniou. Let
but public opinion bear on this point in other countries, as it
does among the more enlightened classes in France, and
similar effects will be produced.
The matter is a trifle. The mere act of animal satisfaction,
counts with any man of commonly cultivated feelings, as but
a small item in the aggregate of enjoyment which satisfied
affection aifords; and, surely, whether that act be at ali
times attended with the utmost degrees of physica pleasure
or not, must, even with the felfish, be a secondary and unim
portant consideration. His moral sentiments must be espe
cially weak or uncultivated, who will not admit, that it is the
gratification of the social feelings—the repose of the affec
tions—which, at all times, constitutes the chief charm of
human intercourse.
The least injurious among the present checks to popula
tion, celibacy, is a mortification of the affections, a violence
done to the social feelings, sometimes a sacrifice even of the
health. Not one of these objections can be urged to the
trifling restraint proposed.
As to the cry which prejudice may raise against it as being
unnatural, it is just as unnatural, and no more so, than to
refrain, in a sultry summer’s day, from drinking, perhaps,
more than a pint of water at a draught, which prudence tells
us is enough, while inclination bids us drink a quart. All
thwarting of any human wish or impulse may, in one sense,
be called unnatural; it is not, however, oft-time the less pru
dent and proper, on that account. Then, too, if this trifling re
straint is to be called unnatural, what shall we say of celibacy ?
As to the practical efficacy of this simple preventive, the
experience of France, where it is extensively practised,
might suffice in proof. I know, at this moment, several
married persons who have told me, that, after having had
as many children as they thought prudent, they hail for years
employed this check, with perfect success. For the satisfaction
of my readers, I will select one particular instance.
I knew personally and intimately for many years, a young ,
man of strict honour, in whose sincerity I ever placed confi- 1
dence, and who confided to me the particulars of his situation. ■,
He was just entering on life, with slender means, and his I
circumstances forbade him to have a large family of chil
dren. He, therefore, having consulted his young wife, prac
tised this restraint, I believe for about eighteen months, and
with perfect success. At the expiration of that period, theij
situation being more favourable, they resolved to become
�MOKAL PHYSioluGY.
4.9
parents; and, in a fortnight after, the wife found herself
pregnant. My friend told me, that though he felt the partial
privation a little at first, a few weeks’ habit perfectly re
conciled him to it; and that nothing but a deliberate con
viction that he might prudently now become a parent,
and a strong desire on his wife’s part to have a child, in
duced him to alter his first practice. I believe I was the
only one among his friends to whom he ever communicated
the real state of the case; and I doubt not there are, even
in this cotf-^try, hundreds of similar cases which the world
never learns any thing about. Hence the doubts and igno
rance which exist on the subject.
I add another instance. A short time since, a respectable
and very intelligent father of a family, about thirty-five
years of a<re, who resides west of the mountains, called at
our office. Conversation turned on the present subject, and
I expressed to him my conviction, that this check was effec
tual. He told me he could speak from personal experience.
He had married young, and soon had three children. These
he could support in comfort, without running into debt or
*
difficulty; but, the price of produce sinking in his neigh
bourhood, there did not appear a fair prospect of supporting a
large family. In _ .'sequence, he and his wife determined to
limit their offspring to three. They havo accordingly em
ployed the above check for seven or eight years; have had
no more children; and have been rewarded for their pru
dence by finding their situation and prospects improving
every year. He confirmed an opinion I have already ex
pressed, by stating, that custom completely reconciled him
to anv slig1,i privation he might at first have felt. I asked
him, whether his neighbors generally followed the same
practice. H" replied, that he could not tell; for he had not
thought it prudent to speak with any but his own relations on
the subject, one or two of whom, he knew, had profited by his
advice, and afterwards expressed to him their gratitude for
the important information.
It is unnecessary farther to multiply instances. The fact
that this check is in common practice, and known to be effi
cacious, in France, is alone sufficient evidence of its practi
cability and safety.
I can readily imagine, that there are men, wSo, in parr
from temperament, but much more from the continued habit
of unrestrained indulgence, may have so little command
over their passions, as to find difficulty in practising it; and
some, it may be, who will declare it to be impossible. If any
D
�50
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
there be to whom itzs impossible, (which I very much doubt,
I am at least convinced that the number is exceedingly small;
not a fiftieth part of those who may at first imagine such to be
their case.
I may add, that partial withdrawal is not an infallible pre
ventive of conception.
Other modes of prevention have been employed. I have
selected this, because I judge it to be at once the most simple,
and the most efficacious. Those who have employed it for
ys»ars, seem to concur in the opinion that it. is, as regards its
influence on health, innocent: it has even been said to
*
produce on the human system an influence similar to that of
temperance in diet; but this I doubt. As regards any moral
impropriety in its use, enough methinks has already been said,
to convince all except those who will not be convinced, that
to employ it, in all cases where prudence or the well-being
of our companions requires it, is an act of practical virtue.
It may be said, and said truly, that this check places the
power chiefly in the hands of the man, and not, where it
ought to be, in those of the woman. She, who is the sufferer,
is not secured against the culpable carelessness, or perhaps
the deliberate selfishness, of him who goes free and unblamed
whatever may happen. To this, the reply is, that the best and
only effectual defence for women is to refuse connexion with
any man void of honor. An (almost omnipotent) public opinion
would thus be speedily formed: one of immense moral utility,
by means of which the man’s social reputation would be
placed, as it should be, in the keeping of women, whose
moral tact and nice discrimination in such matters is far
superior to ours. How mighty and beneficent the power
which such an influence might exert, and how essentially and
rapidly it might conduce to the gradual, but thorough extir* Experience, extensive and carefully recorded, can alone verify, as
in a matter so important ought to be verified, the opinion here expressed
touching the innocence to health of the preventive recommended. No
one is justified in speaking positively on such a subject, until he has
accumulated a greater mass of facts than I, or perhaps any other indi
vidual, have yet had the means of ascertaining. The subject once
agitated, such facts will gradually come to light. <n the mean time let
us bear in mind, that the truth and importance of th abstract principle
*
rest not on the accuracy of the physiological items here adduced. A
preventive check to population is a thing in itself good and desirable, or
it is the reverse. If good and desirable, men and women will ultimately
perceive it to be so, and will search and experiment until they discover
what practice is best. Of this, as of other branches of physical science,
time alone can elucidate and substantiate the details.
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
51
pation of those selfish vices, legal and illegal, which now dis
grace and brutify our species, it is difficult even to imagine.
In the silent, but resistless progress of human im
provement, such a change is fortunately inevitable. We
are gradually emerging from the night of blind prejudice and
of brute force; and, day by day, rational liberty and cultivated
refinement, win an accession of power. Violence yields to
benevolence, compulsion to kindness, the letter of law to the
spirit of justice : and, day by day, men and women become
more willing, and better prepared, to entrust the most sacred
duties (social as well as political) more to good feeling and
less to idle form—more to moral and less to legal keeping.
It is no question whether such reform will come: no
human power can arrest its progress. How slowly or how
rapidly it may come, is a question ; and depends, in some
degree, on adventitious circumstances. Should this little
book prove one among the number of circumstances to ac
celerate, however slightly, that progress, its author will be
repaid, ten times over, for the trifling labor it has cost
him.
In conclusion, it may be useful to state to the reader the
following facts. A knowledge of this and other checks to
population has been, for many years, extensively disseminated
in most of the populous towns in Great Britain by hundreds
of thousands ofhand-bills which were gratuitously distributed
from benevolent motives. The men who were first instru mental
in making them known in England are all elderly men,fathers
of families of children grown up to be men and women ; men
of unquestioned integrity and moral character; many of them
men of science, and some of them known as the first political
economists of the age. Beside the allusion to thesubjectalready
given from the Encyclopaedia Britannica, it is adverted to in
Place’s “ Illustrations of the principles of Population;” in Mill’s
“ Elements of Political Economy in Thompson’s “ Distri
bution of Wealth,” and probably in other works with which
I am unacquainted. It was also (disguisedly) broach ed in
several English newspapers, and was preached in lectur es to
the laboring classes, by a benevolent man, at Leeds. I do
not believe the subject has ever been touched upon, ex
cept by men of irreproachable moral character, and gene
rally of high standing in society. The chief difference
between this little treatise, and the allusions made by the
distinguished authors above mentioned, is, that what public
opinion would only permit them to insinuate, I venture to say
plainly.
~
D 2
�52
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
My readers may implicitly depend on the accuracy of the
facts I have stated. Though, in the present state of public
opinion, I may not, for obvious reasons, give names in proof,
yet it is evident that I can have no motive whatever to mislead
or deceive. I shall consider it a favor if any individuals who
can adduce, from personal experience, facts connected with
this subject, will communicate them to me.
Note. The enlightened Condorcet, in his well-known “ Esquisse des
progres de I’esprit humain,” -very distinctly alludes to the safety and
facility with which population might be restrained, “ if reason should
but keep pace with the arts and sciences, and if the idle prejudices of
superstition should cease to shed over human morals an austerity cor
rupting and degrading, not purifying or elevating.” See his Esquisse,
pages 285 to 288, Paris Ed. 1822. Malthus (see his “ Essays on Popu
lation,’' Book III. chap. 1.) “professes not to understand the French
philosopher.” No Frenchman could misunderstand him.
CHAPTER VII.
CONCLUDING REMARKS.
That most practical of philosophers, Franklin, interprets
chastity to mean, the regulated and strictly temperate satisfac
tion, without injury to others, of those desires which are natural
to all healthy adult beings. In this sense chastity is the first
of virtues, and one most rarely practised, either by young
*
men or by married persons, even when the latter most scru
pulously conform to the letter of the law.
*
The promotion of such chastity is the chief object of tne
present work. It is all-important for the welfare of our
race, that the reproductive instinct should never be selfishly
indulged ; never gratified at the expense of the well-being of
our companions. A man who, in this matter, will not con
sult, with scrupulous deference, the slightest wishes of the
other sex ; a man who will ever put his desires in competi
tion with theirs, and who will prize more highly the pleasure
lie receives than that he may be capable of bestowing—such
a man, appears to me, in the essentials of character, a brute.
* My father, Robert Owen’s definition of chastity is also an excellent
and an important one: “PROSTITUTION, Sexual intercourse without
affection: CHASTITY, Sexual intercourse with affection.”
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
53
The brutes commonly seek the satisfaction of their propen
sities with straight-forward selfishness, and never calculate
whether their companions are gratified or teased by their im
portunities. Man cannot assimilate his nature more closely
to theirs than by imitating them in this.
Again. There is no instinct in regard to which strict tem
perance is more essential. All our animal desires have
hitherto occupied an undue share of human thoughts; but
none more generally than this. The imaginations of the young
and the passions of the adult are inflamed by mystery or
excited by restraint, and a full half of all the thoughts and
intrigues of the world has a direct reference to this single
instinct. Even those who, like the Shakers, “ crucify the
flesh,” are not the less occupied by it in their secret thoughts;
as the Shaker writings themselves may afford proof. Neither
human institutions nor human prejudices can destroy the
instinct. Strange it is, that men should not be content ration
ally to control and wisely to regulate it.
It is a question of passing importance, IIow may it Dest
he regulated?” Not by a Shaker vow of monkish chastity.
Assuredly not by the world’s favorite regulator, ignorance.
No. Do we wish to bring this instinct under easy govern
ment, and to assign it only its due rank among human senti
ments ? Then let us cultivate the intellect, let us exercise
the body, let us usefully occupy the time, of every human
being. What is it gives to passion its sway, and to desires
their empire, now ? It is vacancy of mind; it is listlessness
of body ; it is idleness. A cultivated race are never sensual;
a hardy race are seldom love-sick ; an industrious race have
no time to be sentimental. Develope the moral sentiments,
and they will govern the physical instincts. Occupy the
mind and body usefully, intellectually ; and the propensities
will obtain that care and time only which they merit. Upon
any other principle we may doctor poor human nature for
ever, and shall only prove ourselves empirics in the end.
Mortifications, vestal vows, mysteries, bolts and bars, prud
ish prejudices—these are all quack-medicines; and are only
calculated to prostrate lhe strength and spirits, or to heighten
the fever, of the patient. If we will dislodge error and pas
sion, we must replace them by something better. They say
that a vacuum cannot exist in nature. Least of all can it exist
in the human mind. Empty it of one folly, cure it of one
vice, and another flows in to fill the vacancy, unless it find it
already occupied by intellectual exorcise and common sense
�54
MORAL PHYSIOLOGY.
Husbands and fathers! study Franklin’s definition of chas
tity. Your fears, your jealousies, have hitherto been on the
stretch to watch and guard: reflect whether it be not pleasan
ter and better, to enlighten and trust.
Honest ascetics ! you have striven to mortify the flesh;
ask yourselves whether it be not wiser to control it. You have
sought to crucify the body ; consider whether it be not more
effectual to cultivate the mind.
Have you succeeded mi
spiritualizing your secret thoughts? If not, inquire whether
every human propensity, duly governed, be not a benefit and
a blessing to the nature in which it is inherent.
Human beings, of whatever sex or class I examine dispas
sionately and narrowly the influence which the control here
recommended will produce throughout society. Reflect
whether it will not lighten the burdens of one sex, while it
affords scope for the exercise of the best feelings of the other.
Decide whether its tendency be not benignant and elevating;
conducive to the exercise of practical virtue, and to the per
manent welfare of the human race.
�APPENDIX
TO THE FIFTH EDITION.
Reception of the Work by the Public. Opinion of a talented Author. Opinion
of a Physician and Professor. Letter from a Mechanic. The work never in
tended as a political panacea. Transmission of hereditary disease. Letter on
the subject. Letter from a French gentleman. Physiological argument in fa
vor of temperance. Experience of two members of the Society of Fri ends
Objection of J. W. Objections by a physician of Indiana. Answer to them
Weighty objections. Suggestion in a letter from Manchester.
New-York, June 25, 1831
Seven months have not yet elapsed since the first publication of
“ Moral Physiology
and already I am called upon to pre
pare a fifth edition. If I am pleased (as what author is not) to
see that my labors are appreciated by the public, I am also
reminded of the additional obligations I lie under, to render the
little treatise as complete and as free from error and inaccuracy
as possible.
I have therefore carefully revised the work, and made such
amendments as have suggested themselves during these seven
months. And as, in the course of that time, I have received a mul
titude of communications (some verbal.but chiefly by letter) on ths
subject in question, I shall here add, in the shape of Appendix,
such extracts from, and comments on, a few of these, as seem
<.0 me interesting and useful.
I expected much opprobrium from the work ; and have been
not a , little surprised to find my expectations agreeably dis
�APPENDIX.
56
appointed. Never, in my life, have I written any thing that so
nearly united the suffrages of all whose opinion I care for, or
which has been suffered to spread more quietly by our opponents.
Jn this, these latter have acted wisely. Had they abused it, it
might have been the Appendix to the twentieth, not to the fifth,
edition I should now be writing.
The sentiments of approval which have reached me from vari
ous quarters, have, in the expressive language of the Old Book,
“ strengthened my hands and encouraged my heart;” for,
though the world’s opinion be worth little, there are individualsin
it whose opinion is worth much; and though a consciousness of
rectitude may support a man against all opinions, yet it is plea
sant to find, now and then, in one’s progress, concurrent senti
ments from those we esteem.
I imagine that it may afford similar encouragement, in a de
gree, to any of my readers who may chance to approve what they
read, if I quote for them a few of these opinions. I begin by se
lecting for the purpose two, which come from men both known to
me, as to the American public, only by their writings. Could I
give the names of the writers, these w ould be sufficient to secure
for their opinions a weight which no anonymous sentiments can
obtain. But, in the present state of public opinion, I do not feel
myself at liberty to do so. My readers must therefore be content
to take my word for it, that both the writers are gentlemen who
nave displayed in their works talents of a high order, and whose
personal acquaintance I should highly value.
I extract from the first letter the following:
“ I am greatly obliged to you for sending me your ‘ Moral Phy
siology.’ I have read it with pleasure and instruction. I see not
why you should anticipate censure, from any quarter, for its pub
lication. It contains no sentiment or doctrine which strikes me
unfavorably, or which any person could wish suppressed. Had
the same thoughts occurred to me, I should have entertained
them, and possibly published them, without the least suspicion of
offence to delicacy or good morals.
“ I fully concur with you, that truth can do the world no harm.
Nor do I doubt that he would be deemed a benefactor, (even an
exceedingly great benefactor,) who can teach man how to limit
his powers of reproduction without abridging his enjoyments.”
Again, the same correspondent says :
“ The value of the pow'er to limit offspring is, I think, very se
parable from any theory which involves consequences arising from
�APPENDIX.
67
the extent of population which the earth can sustain. The liini.
tation is a matter which concerns the present comfort of indivu
duals, in their private capacity; while the extent of the earth’
ultimate fecundity concerns only the thoughts of speculatists and
politicians. I say this, because I am not troubled by the spectre
of Malthus.”
This appears to me an enlightened, and also a very practical
view of the subject. The political economy of the question ought
ever to be kept separate from its moral bearings. The conse
quences involved by the former, are distant, and may be called
theoretical; while those resulting from the latter, are immediate,
and of daily recurrence in practice. If there were no tendency
whatever in the human race to increase beyond its present num
bers, the question would still be one of vital interest, and the con
sequences it involves would still be of surpassing importance to
man in his social and domestic relations. The more I reflect on
the subject, the more thoroughly convinced I am, that man can
never attain to any thing like social cultivation, without a know
ledge of the means to limit, at pleasure and without much sacri
fice of enjoyment, his power of reproduction. And I cannot but
think, that all who have seen much of the civilised world, and
carefully traced out the various causes of the vices and miseries
that pervade it, will, upon reflection, concur with me in the
opinion.
The second writer of whom I spoke (an eminent physician and
professor) says:
“ I have received your ‘ Moral Physiology.’ Your boldness
and independence are entitled to great respect. It is a very im
portant question, and ought to be brought forward, that the pub
lic opinion concerning it may be based on the only proper ground,
full and free and patient public discussion. Your method of hand
ling the subject I approve. Place, the political economist, sug
gests the remedy more boldly than any other.”
The next communication from which I shall copy is from a
young man of excellent character, living in a neighbouring state,
and now one of the conductors of a popular periodical. After sug
gesting to me the propriety of re-publishing some English works
now out of print, he proceeds as follows :
“-------- , February 23, 1831.
Had I not been addressing you upon another subject, I should
nnt have ventured to obtrude on you my small meed of approba
tion, due to your last work ; but I cannot let slip this opportunity
�58
APPENDIX.
of endeavouring to express how much I feel indebted to you for
its publication.
“ To know how I am so indebted, it is necessary you should
also know something of my situation in life : and when it is de
scribed, it is perhaps a description of the situation of two-thirds of
the journeymen mechanics of this country.
“ I have been married nearly three years, and am the father of
two children. Having nothing to depend upon but my own in
dustry, you will readily acknowledge that I had reason to look
forward with at least some degree of disquietude to the prospect
of an increasing family and reduced wages: apparently the inevi
table lot of the generality of working men. Under these circum
stances, I saw W. Jackson’s article in the Delaware Free Press •
but my feelings as a freeman (nominally) revolted at it, and I
must say that I felt greatly pleased when I found that his’ system
did not meet your approbation. You had spoken upon the sub
ject, but, like the Nazarene Reformer, you spoke in parables.
‘ Every Woman’s Book’ I could not see ; and, had not Dr. Gibbons afforded me an example of how much you might be misre
presented, I might have been tempted to believe the slanders cir
culated regarding you.
“ I had apparently nothing left but to let matters take their
own course, when your ‘ Moral Physiology’ made its appearance.
“ I read it; and a new scene of existence seemed to open be
fore me. I found myself, in this all-important matter, a free
agent, and, in a degree, the arbiter of my own destiny. I could
have said to you, as Selim said to Hassan,
‘ Thou’st hewed a mountain’s weight from off my heart.
*
My visions of poverty and future distress vanished ; the present
seemed gilded with new charms, and the future appeared no
longer to be dreaded. But you can better imagine, than I can
describe, the revolution of my feelings.
“ I have since endeavoured to circulate the little book as
widely as my limited opportunities permit, and shall continue to
do so, believing it to be the most useful work that has made its
appearance since the publication of Paine’s ‘ Common Sense
and convinced that, by so doing, I shall render you the most
acceptable return, in my power to make, for the benefit you have
conferred upon me as an individual
G.”
The next extract, from an inhabitant of Pennsylvania, I have
selected chiefly as it furnishes a beautiful, and, alas ! a rare, ex
�APPENDIX.
59
ample, of that parental conscientiousness which scruples to inipar‘
existence, where it cannot also impart the conditions necessary
to render that existence happy
“----------- , March 23, 1831.
*
% “ I use no meat, unless eggs may be considered such; I drink
neither tea, coffee, nor any thing more exciting than milk and
water; and, like yourself, I am fully satisfied, having no craving
after the luxuries of the table. With regard to ‘ Moral Physio
*
logy, let the following facts speak :
** I was born of poor parents, and early left an orphan.
When of age, though my circumstances promised poorly for
the support of a family, I desired to marry, knowing that a
good wife would greatly add to my happiness. The check spoken
of in your book (withdrawal) presented itself to my mind. And
for seven years that I have now been married, lhave continued to
practise it. I was successful in business, and acquired the means
of maintaining a family; but still I have refrained, because my
constitution is such an one as I think a parent ought not to transmit
to his offspring. I prefer refraining from giving birth to sentient
beings, unless I can give them those advantages, physical as well
as moral and intellectual, which are essential to human happiness.
“ One thing I have observed, that since I have adopted a simple
diet, and laid by all artificial stimuli, not only is my health better
and my mind more clear, but I can abstain, at will, without in
jury or inconvenience, from sexual connexion for any length of
time;’ and this without having, in the least, lost any power in
that respect.
T.”
* We applaud as a marvel, the continence of Scipio. Such continence—and
amid circumstances far more trying—is habitually found (under no other re
straint than that of public opinion) among the native Indians of our continentA friend of mine, whose family was captured by a party of Mohawk Indians some
fifty years ago, informed me, that four young women (two of them of considera
ble beauty) who were made prisoners on that occasion, were not once, during a
residence of several years, addressed, even with the remotest degree of sexual im
portunity, by an Indian, old or young, though living with them in the same wig
wam. These young women were the near relatives of the friend who related this
fact to me; and it was from their own lips he obtained it. Yet these were sa
vages.
4 How common would be such 'virtue among ourselves, but for the artificial
Stimuli, and as artificial restraints, which custom and Jaw make prevalent amonv
as.
R. D. O.
�60
APPENDIX.
From the letter of in aged French gentleman, who holds a
public office in the western country, I translate the following •
and I would that every young man and woman in these United
States could read it:
•‘I have read your little work with much interest, and desire
that it may have a wide circulation, and that its recommendations
may be adopted in practice. If you publish a third edition, I
could wish that you would add a piece of advice of the greatest
importance, especially to young married persons. Many women
are ignorant, that, in the gratification of the reproductive instinct
the exhaustion to the man is much greater than to the woman:
a fact most important to be known, the ignorance of which has
caused more than one husband to forfeit his health, nay, his life.
Tissot tells us, that the loss by an ounce of semen is equal to that
by forty ounces of blood ; and that in the case of the healthiest
*
man, nature does not demand connexion oftener than once a
month.!
“ How many young spouses, loving their husbands tenderly
and disinterestedly, if they were but informed of these facts, would
watch over and and preserve their partners’ healths, instead of
exciting them to over-indulgence 1
“ I send you a copy of Italian verses,; appropriate, like the
German stanza you have quoted in your work, to the above re
marks :
(
* Merta gli allori al crine
Chi scende in campo arinato,
• This of course must be rather a matter of conjecture and approximation, than
of accurate calculation.
r. d. O.
F- t And I doubt whether she permits it without more or less injury, to the average
of constitutions, oftener than once a week. I am convinced that atty young man who
will carefully note and compare his sensations, will become convinced, that tem
perance forbids such indulgence, at any rate, more than twice a week; and
that he trifles with his constitution who neglects the prohibition. How immea
surably important that parents should communicate to their sons, but especially
to their daughters, facts like these!
t For the English reader, 1 have attempted the following imitation of the above
lines:
Crown his brows with laurel wreath,
Who can tread the field* of death—
�6h
APPENDIX.
Chi a cento squadre a late,
Impallidir non sa:
Ma pih gloria ha nel fronte
Chi, alia ragion soggetto,
D’un sconsigliato affetto
Trionfator si ft.
I extract the following from my journal:
“ A member of the Society of Friends, from the country, called
at our office; he informed me that he had been married twenty
years, had six children, and would probably have had twice as
many, had he not practised withdrawal, which he found, in every
instance efficacious. By this means he made an interval of two
or three years between the births of each of his children. Hav
ing at last a family of six, his wife earnestly desired to have no
more ; and on one occasion, when she imagined that the necessary
precautions bad been neglected, she shed tears at the prospect of
again becoming pregnant. He said he knew, in his own neigh
bourhood, several married women who were rendered miserable
on account of their continued pregnancy, and would have given
any thing in the world to escape, but knew not how.”
This gentleman corroborated the opinion I have suggested
(page 50,) that the habit of withdrawal had an influence similar
to that of temperance in diet. Ke had found it, he said, much less
exhausting than unrestrained indulgence.
Another gentleman, also belonging to the Society of Friend^,
has since confirmed to me (as a fact proved to him by personal
experience) the above opinion. He likewise expressed his con
viction that the habit was greatly conducive to the preservation
of those first, fresh feelings, so beautiful, and, alas ! so evanes
cent,) under which the married usually come together.
.1
Tread—with armed thousands near—
And know not what it is to fear.
But greater far his meed of praise,
luster his claim to glory’s bays,
Who, true to reason’s voice, to virtue’s call,
Conquers himself, the noblest need of all.
R. D. O..
�APPENDIX.
In reply to a correspondent, J. W., who cites a case of Pria
*
pism mentioned in a Medical Journal some eight or ten years
6ince, and which pathological derangement he thinks was attri
butable to the habit of withdrawal, I reply, that the confurrent testimony of all who can speak from experience on the
subject, disproves not of course the fact he cites, but the propriety
of attributing the effect produced to the cause in question. Pria
pism, it is well known, is frequently caused by sexual excess ; and
was probably so caused in the case alluded to. Such excess is
much less likely to take place, when withdrawal is practised, than
during unrestrained indulgence.
It now remains for me to notice a communication which I re
cently received from a medical gentleman residing iu Indiana, for
whose character I entertain much respect. It regards the phy
siological portion of the work, which the writer, Dr. S----- -, thinks
is altogether inaccurate.
He refers me to Burns’, Denman’s, and Dewee’s Midwifery,
and especially to an essay by Dr. Caldwell, of Transylvania
University, on Generation, in proof that all are not agreed that
the semen must enter the uterus in order to effect impregnation.
He instances a case published in the New-York Medical Reposi
tory, and another in the Western Quarterly Reporter, in which
impregnation was effected, though immediately previous to the
child’s birth the vagina was found only large enough to admit a
common knitting needle, and the medical attendant had, in con
sequence, to make an artificial passage. And he argues, on the
authority of this and other instances where there existed such
mechanical obstruction in the vagina, os tincae,or colimn uteri, as
to render the passage of the seminal fluid next to impossible, that
tha^ fluid does not enter the uterus at all, and, consequently, that
the doctrine on which the whole work is founded, is physiologi
cal! y false; and, as being false, is calculated to do much and cruel
mischief. There are two chief theories, he says, now generally
received on the subject, the absorbent and the sympathetic ; ac
cording to both of which, all that appears absolutely necessary to
impregnation is, that the semen should be deposited somewhere in
the vagina; perhaps, to be taken up by a set of absorbent vessels,
and by them conveyed to the ovum, which ovum is, in its turn
taken up by thefinibriated ends of the Fallopian tube, and thereby
deposited in the uterus: perhaps (but I confess this seems to me
a very poetical theory,) merely to produce simultaneous anft
sympathetic action, thereby effecting the great and secret work
of nature.
�APPENDIX.
63
Now, my expression was, that “ almost all physiologists are
agreed, that the entrance of the sperm itself, or of some volatile
particles proceeding from it, into the uterus, must precede con
ception.”* The favorers of the absorbent theory will not, I pre
sume, deny this ; the few advocates of the sympathetic may.
Nor am I tenacious as regards any theory whatever, on a subject
of which the arcana still remain shrouded in comparative mystery.
Enough for my purpose, that the condition indispensable to repro
duction is, (as Dr. S----- himself reminds us,) the deposition of
the sperm in the vagina. The preventive suggested in “ Moral
Physiology,” positively precludes the fulfilment of this condition ;
and it could only have been, I imagine, by confounding it with
the partial expedient of which I have spoken, (page 50,) that
my medical friend arrived at the conclusion to which I have here
alluded.
The only argument which I conceive can be fairly urged against
it by the physiologist,j- is that to which I have adverted and replied:
(last paragraph of page 49.)
* In proof that I have not spoken unadvisedly on this subject, I may quote
what. I believe, is now considered the highest authority.
I “If the most recent works on Physiology are to be credited, the nterus, during
impregnation, opens a little, draws in the semen by inspiration, and directs it to
the ovarium by means of the Fallopian tubes, whose fimbriated extremity closely
embrace that organ.”—Magendie, p. 416, Philad. Ed.
SeealSd Blundell's and Haighton’s experiments on the rabbit, at Guy’s hospi
tal. See also Spallanzani’s experiments.
# I feel it to be my duty to add, that, since my arrival in England, I have heard
another physiological objection urged against this particular cheek ; namely, that
its influence on the female health is sometimes injurious. It has been suggested
that the deposition of sperm in the vagina cannot be dispensed with during the
.period of excitement, without producing mischievous consequeuces. In so far as
ttw may be a mere theoretical influence—a hazarded opinion, like so many other
opinions, as to “ what, in the nature of things, surely must be”—in this view of
it, I Conceive the objection entitled to little or no weight. But in so far as it may
be substantiated by facts, it is entitled to much weight. We want to know, not
what vague inference suggests, but what actual experience proves. If, unfortunattiy, experience should prove, that women, in availing themselves of this
eheck, do often, or do sometimes, lose their health, either in consequence of the
gtatifiertes being imperfect, or from any other cause, then the objection would
W fatal; and it would behove ns to enquire, whether some other check could
not be found, which even if less infallible, should be more innocent: sueb
�64
APPENDIX.
Having thus answered all the objections which have hitherto
’eached me, I conceive it unnecessary to lengthen this Appendix
by farther quotations approbatory of the work, or corroborative
of the facts it details. Let “Moral Physiology” abide the
ordeal of public examination ; if found wanting, to be cast aside
and forgotten; but if deemed true and useful, to be remembered
and approved.
perhaps, as the insertion into the vagina, previously to coition, of a small,
.moistened sponge, to he immediately afterwards withdrawn : or such as is sugJ
gested in the following extract of a letter which I lately received from a gentle
man of worth and respectability, residing near Manchester:—
“ A mother, whose health was such as to make child-bearing painful and
dangerous to her existence, was desirous, after giving birth to two children, no
urther to increase her family. Her husband’s fondness forbad him to act con
trary to the wishes of his wife: he had, from some source or other, obtained the
information given in your book, and he endeavoured to practise upon it; but
alas ! he was not sufficiently master of his feelings on one or two occasions, and
Lis wife again found herself enceinte.
“ After suffering, during the usual period, all the pains she had before ex
perienced, her health becoming daily more debilitated, she gave, at the narrow
risk of losing her life, birth to a poor little idiot.
“ Since then, a female friend informed her, that, were she to adopt the pre
caution of giving a strong cough immediately after, emission by her husband,
pregnancy would be prevented. She adopted this expedient, and with success.
“ A dear friend of mine, intimate with the lady of whom I have been speaking,
communicated the fact to me, and further assured me, that several females or
her acquaintance had adopted the check and proved its efficacy.
« If, Sir, this.be a sure preventive, 1 think it more safe and natural than with
drawal ; and preferable besides, as placing in the hands of the woman; who has
more caution and more to suffer also than our sex, the power over her destiny.’’
*“ I place these objections and suggestions, a6 they arise, before the public, though
I confess my doubt in regard to the general efficacy of the latter expedient. Let
all such suggestions be canvassed, and taken for what they are worth. Thus, and;
only thus, can truth be elicited.—Note to the Ninth edition
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Moral physiology; or, a brief and plain treatise on the population question
Description
An account of the resource
Edition: New ed.
Place of publication: London
Collation: 64 p. : ill. ; 17 cm.
Notes: First published, New York, 1830. Preface (p. [iii] dated 1832) is to the eighth edition. Signature on half-title: A. Bonner, Plaistow, 19/12/80. Engraving by Vigneron on verso opposite t.p. shows woman abandoning her baby with caption: 'Alas! that it should ever have been born!' Appendix: "To the fifth edition." Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Owen, Robert Dale [1801-1877]
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
E. Truelove
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[pref. 1832]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N520
Subject
The topic of the resource
Population
Birth control
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Moral physiology; or, a brief and plain treatise on the population question), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
NSS
Population
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/f5adb4c846e7ee1f1a96ba6b41b22970.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=cjtVXmcJ7y9k1U1GTHt6DFnngSRciybRamFFNhMSEE2VnDCFgP3ME64IlDVwedZRwe8uGqILYU3ZO8fSFgG0a8kn9ZExU1mVFZzJa77tVqIEpsLzIvI%7EgVq6cyitU2rBlJnqQ1-q19akUCRh15a77tBKNSf8VAKDrzBkLAxoqPLEfWEancmK-uwlPXLVajRBMCQtFmiWKX40G8ZgOYHLMRy1RUHL3-8Eh6ab8WYLYEgm%7EUv1qHbmQQM63WpHNDLdUKCSYiH8k83jvOt%7ENLLR6yjjdkXY%7EtXIceGqIFBPSPKHp1Y5ExclNTQXntdYx%7E4zj6bi31zkHv%7EW9crophjXYA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
51c284ce05653e77536a2c2886143e02
PDF Text
Text
��������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The population question according to T.R. Malthus and J.S. Mill giving the Malthusian theory of over-population
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Drysdale, Charles Robert
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 94 p. ; 18 cm.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Geo. Standring
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1892
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G4997
Subject
The topic of the resource
Birth control
Malthusianism
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The population question according to T.R. Malthus and J.S. Mill giving the Malthusian theory of over-population), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
John Stuart Mill
Malthusianism
Population Increase
T.R. (Thomas Robert) Malthus
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/9c6cd55f985ce73d801bb2d4bd233dec.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=f6urG8N7HRINfHqJAeqfsjHa3N4KSB-FgAtbaHb7P03upxMFc5yksVIAn2n86VPyTy8g4x88ddxgNA7IUhMr8cCK0b4S9c3NnWXz8bwzydXpLHND2IDtVZ5BmIy3iSQU1L-8NXjb9HcWUl4zQnLLTUapyb94Q2DCMT8Tttuk3fhOW1g4xWmg9MlODpyntiiC4o83Ljzje9hDijfuFNQe1Ilyx1XGK3injSyaweTyfGmh66bKziNcLniz2biZCOVOS6UWA3-KToCMJhzQdmcIpG7MdYpVhNnJsSN3hEL6Y7deSpCw1fTbX3PFC9g16Xkk6sKNGFIw4ReM9KsUsPR8vA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
8af9be0272c04566d139030b1ff7074b
PDF Text
Text
» ß 2.572,
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
A PRESSING SOCIAL PROBLEM.
BY CYRIL ABDY GREAVES, D.C.L.
We are constantly hearing of the distress of the
London poor, and of plans for its relief, or, if
possible, extinction. Earl Compton, in the Fort
nightly of January last, shews by statistics that
the London pauper class has increased during
the past three years by 6,000 souls. This- is
appalling!
Three causes may be given for this state of
things:—
1. The general depression of trade.
2. The special depression of the landed
interest.
3. The enormous increase of population.
(1) Under the first head little needs here be
said; except that when men live, as so many do,
from hand to mouth, every occasional slackness
of trade pushes numbers over the barrier which
divides poverty from pauperism.
(2) The second cause is more fraught with ill
for London than is generally believed. I can
�2
testify from experience, drawn from residence in
several connties, that the number employed on
the land is yearly lessening: the reason being
that their employers’ capital (whether tenant
farmer or landowner) is itself lessening.
I leave to abler minds the side-question
whether Free Trade in corn is a blessing or the
reverse on the whole ; suffice it to say that it has
rendered agriculture an unproductive industry,
and flooded the towns—especially London—with
starved-out rustics.
(3) But the third cause is the most serious : it
is a constant, not a variant.
Those who have had much to do with the poor
know that they think that to have a “long”
family is the common lot of all men. They
marry early, and look for one. Their lives are
consequently mere struggles for existence, and
when, in premature old age brought on by over
work and care (how old your poorer poor look at
fifty!), they can no longer do a fair day’s work,
the children they have brought up seldom keep
them, because, forsooth, they the children have
families themselves to toil and slave for; and so
ad infinitum.
But must this wretched series be expanded ad
infinitum, or till this poor old planet of ours be
comes a cold stone, or at least till its inhabitants
have all been reduced to such a dead-level of
poverty that Divine Providence intervenes with
the pruning-hook of pestilence and famine ?
�3
I think not.
bacy ? Ko.
There is a Remedy.
Is it Celi
Celibacy is well enough for those who have the
forethought to postpone present gratification to in
sure future comfort; and it deserves more respect
than it gets; but celibacy—real, continent celi
bacy (any other is worthless)—involves too much
self-denial to be largely practised.
What, then, for the great mass of ordinary
men and women ? This is a delicate subject,
hitherto mainly whispered in the ear; but I have
the courage of my opinion, so wish to proclaim
from the house-top that there are ways by which
married persons may limit the number of their
children, or even have none at all. Much good
could be done if the clergy of all creeds would
forget their odium theologicum and the faculty
their odium medicum. and join in a crusade
against Starvation.
But it is not in great cities alone that the
curse works. It is a far cry from London to
Lewis; but what do we hear from that largest
Hebridean isle ? We hear that the crofters are
violently seizing land and driving away tenants’
stock, in order to have more land to squat upon
and run out (as they have done their own) by
unscientific tillage. Is not over-population the
real reason of the troubles of a larger island than
Lewis ? Land hunger comes from common
hunger. The seed of most revolutions is in the
stomach.
�4
The primaeval impetus, “ Increase and mul
tiply,” has run on till the prediction of the Holy
Founder of Christianity, “Blessed are the barren
that bear not,” is getting a perpetual, not an
occasional fulfilment: if we are not to go on as
“ creatures without reason, born mere animals ”
(2 Peter ii., 12, Revised V.) we must look the
matter in the face; else one needs not be inspired
to predict that petty wars will be as common in
the twentieth century of grace as they were in the
tenth, and infanticide become as recognised an
institution in Europe as now it is in China. Both
which may Heaven avert!
I have hitherto spoken of the poor only; but,
inasmuch as the increase of the children of the
rich aggravates the pressure on the poor, I wish
my strictures to apply to all sorts and conditions
of men, whether they live in the hovel or in the
palace.
KRICB ONE HALFPENNY.
Printed by A. Bonnes, 34 Bouverie Street, and Published for the Author at
63 Fleet Street, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A pressing social problem
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Greaves, Cyril Abdy
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 4 p. ; 17 cm.
Notes: Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[A. Bonner]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[n.d.]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N291
Subject
The topic of the resource
Birth control
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (A pressing social problem), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control-England-London
NSS
Poor-England-London
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/057c9d6f759dfab5a3ba42e8aeea82c2.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=A%7EsIZtlKycsFwAVYxeuT4kIwk6tXqAlA1ZnVXpLRQCMzq1M3H2NTvATHlzm4EtX4Lju5eixQDXR11IGJykxSIgQp83mRMoQZcv84BVF8zM28aGeRbMidBfGJ6rDT7lLQYm6vGxj3kkTh7fIRk3b3BzTXguxfgVqmWa5ugHsgBahSQk8RIZh8Xi36BhJqfJfpRD0%7EV8Z82gwe0GKn6Eqw2AyIfTwXW2OkGoJw9nAtrt0my9Rp%7EFjh7pCyhUrDNNKYfgtnYYKHr1IA8CS0nv%7EGqm8xw1ZKvwaoBeCdMGcXAlb9-G7NNd9NdZF3liQA0pfHf2NLvLwbZlpqQbBpD5t2Kw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
0a5409e92b38673546a588ec80dbf456
PDF Text
Text
e>2-rn
tJoZ|/
SEXUAL ECONOMY,
AS TAUGHT BY
CHARLES BRADLAUGH, M.P.
BY
PETER AGATE, M.D.
WITH ADDENDUM BY SALADIN.
London:
W. STEWART & Co., 41, FARRINGDON St., E.C.
��CONTENTS.
PAGE
Introduction ...
...
...
...
The Two B.’s and “ The Elements ”
...
Bradlaugh’s Quarrel with Joseph Barker ...
Sexual Religion
...
...
...
The Neo-Malthusian Doctrine of Marriage
Palaeo-Secular Views of Social Evils
...
Palseo-Secular Medicine...
...
...
The Palaeo-Secularist Malthusians
...
Palaeo-Secularist Society
...
...
Addendum, by Saladin...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
..
5
15
18
22
28
32
37
45
5;
53
��INTRODUCTION.
Saladin, chaste knight ot Secularism, Freethought, Agnos
ticism, says my essay, or compilation, illustrative of Bradlaughism, Cat-and-Ladleism, Knowltonism, and the moral
sewage question generally, needs an introduction. He knows
better than I; so probably it does. My instant and eager
reply was : Who so fit and proper to introduce an unknown
volunteer, meddling in a matter which does not in the least
concern him personally—who so competent as the illustrious
Saladin—poet, philosopher, moralist—whom I have never
seen, and only read a year or two, from week to week in his
Secular Review I
But why not give the letter as I wrote it ? Here it is,
verbatim et literatim. In a matter which future ages will
consider so important every scrap relating to the champion
of Freethought and purity of morals will have its interest
and value. I wrote :—
“My Dear Saladin!—You think I need to be intro
duced. Well, why not introduce me ? You know the whole
matter of this controversy so much better than I do. A
few lines from your vigorous pen will be better than any
thing I could write. I agree that they should be written ;
but, as you have the matter so much better in hand, and as
I really need to be introduced, why not prettily and grace
fully introduce me ?
“ I remember, many years ago, reading an English book
which defended—in fact, recommended—incest, Sodomy,
�6
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
and bestiality, and denounced the laws against them as
superstitious tyranny. It was a nasty, bad book; but I do
not believe it was a tenth-part so mischievous as this work of
Dr.--------- , which I hold to be false in science—which
is, of course, to be bad in morals. Man, as the highest, or
most developed, animal, should be better, more natural, than
the lower species. Why man goes wrong, and how he goeswrong, in these matters, I do not know, as I do not know
the ultimate why or how of anything; only that all vicesseem to me unnatural, and all unnatural practices vicious—
two words for the same thing.
“When I can get to it I mean to go into all these ques
tions as thoroughly as I can. In the meantime, or just
now, will you write the few needed lines of introduction, asyou so well can, or must I write them as well as I can under
the circumstances? You knowing so much better the
reasons why my small pamphlet should be written at all, and
occupying the leading position in this really important con.
troversy.
“ P.S.—It strikes me that the reason for these excessesof early Secularists was the disposition to defend and
recommend whatever had been denounced or forbidden
by religious teachers : the Bible denounced Sabbath-break
ing, so they made it a duty to break the Sabbath; the Bible
burnt up people with fire and brimstone for Sodomy, there
fore they defended Sodomy; and so on.
“Now, if I were to write the introduction or preface, it
would be something like this note. With this note will you
be so kind as to write the introduction ?
“I presume you will, at the proper time, also publicly
introduce, as you have announced, the pamphlet. And I
fancy that, just because it is a scrimmage, it will be read by
a great many who, perhaps, might hesitate to read the Secular
Reviews
That is what I wrote to Saladin. I leave it to the candid'
�INTRODUCTION.
7
veader to say, to himself, whether it is not a reasonable
letter. And here is Saladin’s reply, or, rather, part of it;
for he “ private ”-ly assures me that he has tried and failed,
■and then goes on in this way“ Although, at the date of the publication of the Knowl
ton pamphlet, I was hardly known in the party at all, I
managed to have my name placed on the list of speakers
in.the first meeting that met to protest that anti-Christian
thought was not necessarily associated with an adoption
■of the practices of Onan. The meeting was held at Cleve
land Hall, and was a crowded and excited one. Those
who could not accept Christ, but who seemed eager to
accept Onan, were largely in the ascendant. Mr. Bradlaugh
was evidently the hero of the hour, as he always is with the
rougher and less-cultured order of Freethinkers, who let
him do the thinking, after his fashion, in order to save them
the trouble of thinking at all.
“ Mr. Charles Watts was in the chair, and on the platform
were Mrs. Harriet Law, Mr. George Jacob Holyoake, Mr.
G. W. Foote, and myself. Mr. Holyoake was, as usual,
excessively prudent. He diagnosed the temper of the
meeting, and, instead of venturing to sail against the stream,
■delivered himself of a few colourless platitudes. His shilly
shallying prudence cast its spell over the other speakers
Mr. Watts, as I told him afterwards, made a timid and half
hearted speech, from which I gathered that he wished to
still keep the door open for reconciliation with 1 our chief.’
In fact, in spite of its fleshliness, he had published the
Knowlton pamplilet down to the point where publishing it
became dangerous, and there he had deserted it. Mrs. Law
looked ludicrously sagacious, and half stood to her guns
and half ran away from them. Confronted by that meeting
(probably packed), Mr. Foote alone, of all the prominent
speakers, did not allow his heart to sink down to his boots.
His platform experience was to him invaluable; he uttered
�8
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
some cutting and caustic things, but adroitly managed to
secure as many cheers as hisses. I followed, more in
earnest and more bitter than Mr. Foote, and sadly lacking
in his tact and platform experience. In reply to the hiss of
opposition, which I cared not to conciliate, even if I had
known how, I raised my voice to a shout of defiance. I
managed to make myself heard over the hiss and groan of
Onanic disapprobation, till I thundered forth the words,
‘Charles Bradlaugh has dragged the standard of Freethought through the mire of Holywell Street.’ Upon this
the storm which had been raging burst into a hurricane.
There were clenched fists, and an angry and ominous
surging towards the platform. I stood facing the mass,
mute and defiant. Mr. Holyoake seized my coat-tail, to
pull me back to my chair. Still facing the audience, I
lifted my arm, and, not over gently, dashed away his hand.
The audience noticed this incident, and, for a moment,
their cries and hisses of anger were mixed with a peal of
laughter. Close to my ear I heard, ‘ Draw it mild,’ from
the thin, tin-kettle voice of Mr. Holyoake. I still stood
facing the audience, erect and motionless ; and when, at
length, the storm of groans and hisses died away, I took
one step forward, and repeated, with firm, slow, and syllabic
deliberation : ‘ Charles Bradlaugh has dragged the standard
of Freethought through the mire of Holywell Street I’ ”
There—that is how a poet tells you he cannot write.
How he can write is shown in the Secular Review and, as
to the matter in hand, in “ Knowltonism,”* which he issued
four or five years ago, and which every one who can com
mand twopence-halfpenny may read. In its preface Mr.
Charles Watts recognised the “ unique ability ” of Saladin
in his attack upon “ the vulgar teachings of Knowltonism,”
and also expresses the opinion that this “ must be acknow
ledged as the great social question of the day.”
* “ Knowltonism,” by Saladin.
(London : Watts & Co.)
�INTRODUCTION.
9
In this essay, well worth reading for the powerful conden
sation of its style, Saladin distincts Malthus from Knowlton
with a cut of his sharp scimitar through the bone and marrow
of the Neo-Malthusian Trinity. He insists “ that the means
specified to prevent conception are inadequate to that end,”
as any physiologist can see with half a glance, and as many
a poor girl, no doubt, has experienced to her infinite sorrow
and shame. Saladin maintains that, “ even if Knowltonism
were practicable, per se, it would be unconformable with
physical, and an outrage upon ethical, law.” It is better,
he holds, that the struggles of life should go on, and bring
about their natural results in the “ survival of the fittest.”
He holds with nature all through, yet quotes the delicate
and forcible lines of the Marquis of Queensberry :—
“ Go, tell mankind, see that thy blood be pure,
And visit not thy sins upon thy race;
Curse not thy future age with poisoned blood,
For, cursing, it shall curse thee back again.
*
*
*
For there are they
Who, either from hereditary sin,
Or from the sin they have themselves entailed.
Possess no right to be progenitors. *
*
*
Alas ! that such a cruel wrong should be,
Of sins upon the children visited.
And shall these grow to be progenitors
Of other souls, more burdened than themselves
With feeble bodies of impurity ?
Ye gods, forbid it !”
Saladin eloquently—how could he say anything otherwise
than eloquently and poetically ?—defines the right of every
human being to'be born, and fight his way in this beautiful
world. “ The cardinal duty of humanity,” he holds, is “ to
discover the processes of cosmical law and obey them, not
try to reverse or modify them in the plenitude of spurious
science and the hauteur of unphilosophical arrogance.
Down amid the green algae and the gleaming shells of the
ever-swinging and thundering ocean it is joy to be a bright
�IO
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
and agile herring, even for an hour, before the jaws of the
shark snap rapaciously, and one egoism in the vasty deep
ceases to be. The Babe born on the straw of a hovel, or
amid the silk and down of a palace, inspires and respires
the glad air of being—for life is a boon, whether in cottage
or in castle—sucks from its mother’s breast the nectar of life
and love, stretches out its fingers and its toes, elate with the
rich wine of vital existence; and what is death at seven days
or seventy years ?—Only a forgetting of what has gone by
and an arrestment of what is to come ; only a returning to
where you were before the sun shone in the heavens, towhere you may be when the sun may be no more.
‘ ’Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.’
And it is better to have lived under some circumstances than
never to have lived at all. The trifling differences between
brown bread and water and roast beef and champagne,
between the ingle of the cottar and the saloon of the duke,
are insignificant when taken into consideration with the
cardinal luxury of life. The sky is as blue to the peasant
as to the peer; as sweet is the fragance of the hawthorn, as
magnificent is the vista of hope; as joyous is the action of
muscle and nerve; as sublime and holy the first ecstacies of
‘Love’s Young Dream.’ It is an unfounded assumption,
resulting from the wide social hiatus which separates class
from class, that postulates all the sweetness of life with
riches, and all the bitterness of existence with poverty. If
it be true that the poor man does not eat his dinner because
he has no dinner to eat, the rich man as frequently cannot
eat his on account of dyspepsia and want of appetite ; and
perhaps the latter evil is worse than the former. The worn
fustian, with its spots of grime, ministers as well to the
animal caloric as does the purple and the ermine, flashing
with gold lace and resplendent with jewels. I ask, with him
'
�INTRODUCTION.
11
of Galilee, ‘ Is not the life more than meat and the body
than raiment?’
f
“The Knowltonian, by implication, admits himself to be
a coward, who would shirk the cosmical conditions which
are successfully coped with by the frog and the thistle, and
■even by the ephemera, which at the utmost has only an hour
to live, and has to plunge into the Struggle for Existence
for the privilege of entering upon the part or the whole of
the brief span of its life. With its stifled hum as it buzzes
in the blue air, or expands its wings in the flash of the
summer sun, it recites a homily that the Knowltonian might
con with profit. It enjoys the few minutes it has to live,
provides that there shall be ephemerae when it is no more,
and hums itself into the eternal non-ego of which it knows
as much as the wisest man that ever lived or ever will. Is
man afraid he may succumb to conditions which are suc
cessfully coped with by the aphis ? Even if absolutely
isolated from the male, the female aphis, by the peculiar
method of reproduction known as parthenogenesis, will pro
duce female young, and female young only, at the rate of
fourteen or fifteen a day; and these, in their turn, and in a
very short time, give birth to a third generation, and so on;
and this will go on for years without any male aphis whatever
being for once admitted. And yet in the whole world there
is, perhaps, not a single aphis more than there was a thou
sand years ago. The rapacity of the lady-bird, the lace
wing fly, and other enemies which prey upon the aphidre,
keep them within their legitimate bounds; and so the lady
bird of disease and the lace-wing fly of famine will keep
homo sapiens in his proper bounds without troubling him to
tax his ingenuity to degrade himself off the face of the
earth;
“ With the Knowltonian the earth is analagous to a boat I
at sea crammed with fifty shipwrecked men, but with food
for fifteen only. Under such circumstances it is normal to f
cast lots, and the Jonahs are thrown overboard. But it is
�12
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
better to ultimately get thrown overboard than never to have
been born. A struggle for six minutes in the deep is not so
much more terrible than a six months’ wasting disease in
bed. The man upon whom the lot falls to be drowned may
strip his coat and dive resolutely to death with the conscious
ness that he has, at least, had a grim and wild extension of
fairplay. Thus Knowltonians had better, than exercise
their sexual ‘ checks,’ go to the denizens of Whitechapel and
the Seven Dials at regular intervals, and mark out, Valkeyrylike, the particular individuals they deem redundant in their
microcosm, causing each to take a dose of strychnine, so that
only the correct number of ‘genteel’ people may take the
place of the plethoric fauna of the slums. As I have
pointed out, it is incalculable what philosophers and poets
and statesmen the ‘ checks ’ may dam back in the stream
of human existence. If the Knowltonian must adjust the
supply of the hoi poloi to the demand, he had surely better
do so in the light than in the dark; he had better engage in
a game of discriminating skill than in one of indiscrimi
nating hazard. By his ‘ checks ’ you know not whom he is
keeping out of the world: but, by his gallows, you would
know whom he is sending out of it. If the Knowltonians
were to erect a gallows in Vincent Square and clear out the
Westminster slums by the simple and drastic resource of
good plain hanging, one could have some voucher that they
had not robbed the world of a Shakespeare or a Bacon or a
Gladstone. But by their empirical pottering with sexual
physiology and pathology, with a view to make woman less
of a mother than a sort of safety-valve to sensual passions,
we know not whether we have not lost a spermatozoonal
Milton or a foetal Cromwell.”
In another place he says : “ I ask any of my readers to
note for themselves whether a non-Knowltonian mother of
fifty, and who has borne six or seven children, is not
stronger and healthier and happier than the Knowltonian
mother of the same age, and who has borne only one or
�INTRODUCTION.
13
two. I ask any of my readers to further note whether
every boy and girl of the family of six or seven is not
stronger, healthier, and happier than any member of the
family of one or two. If a woman do succeed in evading
her natural functions of parturition and lactation, she can
do so only by incurring greater sacrifices than parturition
and lactation entail. It is not my purpose to enter here
into the nosology of women who attempt to shirk their
natural and incumbent duty of Motherhood; but the
diseases, ailments, and mental and moral affections incident
to such are many and complicated ; and I aver unhesitat
ingly that the careful and extensive observation of any of
my readers, directed to this subject, will corroborate my
allegation on this point. You can, of course, prevent the
apple-tree from bearing apples; you can bark it, or dig it
half out of the ground, or cut it half through with an axe.
It is just as natural for a woman to bear children as it is for
an apple-tree to bear apples ; and in neither case can you
prevent production without doing violence to the producer.”
The Spartans settled the question in their fashion long
ago. Ignorant of, or scornfully rejecting, preventive checks,
they weeded out all babies that could be better spared. ,
The weaklings went early to the wall. The survival of the
fittest was decided as soon as fitness or unfitness was
apparent. They took also nearly as much trouble in the
breeding of the best qualities of men and women as our
stock-breeders and dog-fanciers now do in producing the
finest specimens of our favourite quadrupeds. Sensible, (
practical people, those Spartans; but not quite what we 'j
should call moral.
My object, in preparing this pamphlet, scarcely needs ex
planation. It is simply to show what is the actual position
of Charles Bradlaugh, M.P., on important questions of morals
and society. I show where he has stood for twenty odd
years. I do not question his right to stand there, nor the
right of the burghers of Northampton to have him for their
�14
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
representative, nor his right to have a seat and vote for his
constituents, the worthy cordwainers, pig-drivers, and Catand-Ladleites. He may stand before Mr. Speaker and shout,
“ So help me God !” (or “ god ”) to his heart’s content.
When Charles Bradlaugh swears allegiance to Queen Victoria,
and asserts his belief in god or God, or publishes “ The
Fruits of Philosophy,” or Mrs. Besant’s improvement upon
Knowltonism, or patronises “ The Elements of Social
Science,” it is no affair of mine. I hold to free thought and
free discussion; but I hold also that a man who aspires to
an eminent and responsible position should be clear, open,
above-board, and responsible for his words and deeds.
I have referred to Bradlaughism or Cat-and-Ladleism asPalaeo-Secularism, and to Saladinism or Anti-Cat-and-Ladleism as Neo-Secularism.
P. A.
�SEXUAL ECONOMY,
AS TAUGHT BY CHARLES BRADLAUGH.
Chapter I.
THE TWO B.’s AND « THE ELEMENTS.”
For about thirty years Mr. Charles Bradlaugh has been a
speaker and writer in the cause of Freethought, Secular
ism, and Atheism. Ambitious of political distinction, he
obtained, a few years ago, an election to the House of
Commons from Northampton. He also managed, in con
nection with a lady who has for some years assisted him in
his labours as writer and public speaker, to get convicted
of the misdemeanour of publishing an immoral pamphlet,
and both were sentenced to a term of imprisonment by the
then Lord Chief Justice; but both managed to escape what
many considered a merited punishment by a technical
informality. Not that a man or woman is the worse for
being legally convicted and unjustly punished. Mr. Brad
laugh and his partner in this supposed iniquity are Malthusians, and the pamphlet for which they were condemned
was written to teach people how they could gratify their
animal propensities without increasing an already burthensome population. The law, as represented by Judge and;
Jury, considered this immoral and criminal. The “Fruits;
of Philosophy ” was suppressed, and the lady in the case
wrote another pamphlet, which she considered better and!
more effective than Knowlton’s.
When elected member of Parliament for Northampton
nothing stood between Mr. Bradlaugh and the object of
�i6
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
his ambition but the oath, which he declared was meaning
less to him, but which he was, nevertheless, quite ready to
take. That is, Charles Bradlaugh, an avowed Atheist, was
more than willing to declare his belief in a God, in the most
solemn and public manner, by an act of religious faith and
worship—by kissing the Bible and saying, “So help me God!”
He actually did this. He read the oath and kissed the
book, putting up a public prayer to God in the House of
Commons; but the House, by a considerable majority,
refused to accept the solemn sacrifice. The Atheist’s prayer
remains unanswered.
I am not condemning Mr. Bradlaugh for not believing in
a God; I am not justifying the House of Commons for
requiring a declaration of such belief from all its members.
Belief is not a voluntary act of the mind, though supposed
to be necessary for admission to heaven and—at least, its
pretence—for taking a seat in Parliament. Mr. Bradlaugh
has for years insisted upon his right to kiss the Bible he
publicly denounces, and to say, “ So help me God!”
Whether an avowed Atheist, a public teacher and defender
of Atheism, can consistently and publicly put up this prayer,
or make this act of faith, is a question of conscience.
Thought is necessarily free. The advocacy of Freethought is not needed. The question is only whether any
expression of the free thoughts of men should be restrained
or punished. When such expression is considered a libel
the law punishes it by fine and imprisonment; when it is
considered treason it may bring heavier penalties. Mr.
Bradlaugh and Mrs. Besant were sentenced to imprisonment
for the publication of their free thoughts as to the policy
and the means of satisfying sexual desires without increas
ing population.
As editor, for a long period, of a Freethought and Secularist
newspaper, and while until recently President of a Secularist
organisation, Mr. Bradlaugh publicly promoted the sale of
a book, entitled “Elements of Social Science”—a work
infinitely more demoralising, according to the common
ideas of morality, than “ The Fruits of Philosophya
book which denounces as a sin and a crime in men and
women what the civilised world has for ages considered
virtue and morality. I have no reason to doubt the sincerity
of Mr. Bradlaugh and His amiable coadjutor, Mrs. Besant
�THE TWO B.’s AND “THE ELEMENTS.”
17
I am not questioning their right to think and feel as they
can or must on all matters of religion or morals. The
policy of electing persons who promulgate such opinions to
Parliament is quite another matter, which constituencies must
settle for themselves. My sole object in this pamphlet is
to show what Mr. Charles Bradlaugh, M.P., has avowed as
his belief, and what he has publicly taught and, if a con
sistent man, privately practised; but that, of course, is no
one’s business but his own and that of “ whom it may
• concern.” I have nothing to do with any portion of his life
but his public teachings. For many years he has been the
friend and associate of the author of “ The Elements of
Social Science.” He has defended, eulogised, and, to the
extent of his influence, promoted the circulation of that
book. What I do and all I do is to show what that book
is by extracts from its pages. I only review the book, as
might be done in any magazine or newspaper, with such
extracts as show its scope, intention, and character.
I have nothing to do with the motives of either the
anonymous author or the well-known promoter of “ The
Elements.” I think I shall do a public service by showing
the character of the book and its promoter, even if its sale
is thereby increased. It is better, in all such cases, that the
truth should be known. If, knowing the facts, people choose
to stand by Mr. Bradlaugh and Mrs. Besant, that is their
affair, not mine. I have no animosities to gratify. If a
majority of the electors of Northampton wish to be repre
sented by Mr. Bradlaugh, that is their business. If the
people of the United Kingdom wish to adopt the opinions
of Mr. Bradlaugh and his co-workers, it is no affair of
mine. If the palseo-Secularist sect or party wants him for its
leader, champion, and chief, their choice is free. They can
throw over Saladin, stand by the Neo-Malthusians, fatten
on “ The Fruits of Philosophy,” and revel in “ The Elements
~^f Social Science.”
�18
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
Chapter II.
BRADLAUGH’S QUARREL WITH JOSEPH
BARKER.
Strange as the fact may seem, it is quite true that the Secu
larist party in Great Britain has divided on the question of
social or sexual morality. The party of Bradlaugh and
Besant—the readers of the National Reformer, the NeoMalthusians and Knowltonites—have taken their stand
irrevocably on the doctrines of the Malthusian League and
“The Elements of Social Science.” This book was first
published about twenty years ago. It purports to be written
by “ A Graduate of Medicine,” whose name has never been
made public; but, as the articles on Political Economy and
Malthusianism, in the National Reformer in i860,.signed
“ G. R.,” are evidently by the same hand, and as “G. R.”
is the annotator of Mr. Bradlaugh’s and Mrs. Besant’s edition
of “ The Fruits of Philosophy,” we cannot be wrong in
attributing to “ G. R.” the authorship of “ The Elements of
Social Science.”
In the National Reformer of July 20th, 1861, Mr. Joseph
Barker, co-editor with Mr. Charles Bradlaugh, denounces, in
his half of the Secularist organ, people who are filling the
other half with “ follies, indecencies, immoralities, and
crimes.” “ The Elements of Social Science ” having been
commended by Mr. Bradlaugh, Mr. Barker declares that
“a work that exhibits, in ranker abundance or grosser
hideousness, all the bad qualities of the most revolting books
we never read;” and he denounces it as containing “ the
greatest amount of evil in the world,” and full of “ demo
ralising sentiments and odious vices ;” as containing “ popu
lation fallacies,” things “as foul as filth, the best of which a
man of sense and decency would sooner die than recom
mend
and yet this book, Mr. Barker complained most
bitterly, had been advertised and strongly and repeatedly
recommended in the other half (Mr. Bradlaugh’s half) of the
�BRADLAUGH’S QUARREL WITH JOSEPH BARKER.
19
National Reformer. He complained also that Mr. Bradlaugh
had sent a secret circular to the shareholders of the National
Reformer, and had formed a conspiracy with some of his
friends to get exclusive possession of it, “ and so exclude all
articles of a moral tendency, and devote it to the spread of
negative and purely demoralising forms of Secularism,” their
object being, he said, “ to destroy all sense of moral obliga
tion, and curse mankind with an unbounded sensual license.”
11 G. R.” came to the rescue and defended Mr. Bradlaugh.
Mr. Barker, August 3rd, admits that many public advo
cates of liberal views had been notoriously immoral, and
had published indecent and immoral works. Mr. Holyoake,
more scrupulous than many others, would not publish
Rousseau’s “ Confessions ” entire; but another Freethought
publisher did, and his edition was recommended in Mr.
Bradlaugh’s side of the National Reformer. Then Mr.
Barker goes on to denounce immoral Sceptics, and declares
that, if he cannot find moral ones, he will bury himself in
the wilds of America; as he did, poor man, some years later.
He says : “ Mr. Bradlaugh is terribly mistaken if he supposes
he can drag down Buckle and Mill into the filthy slough in
which he is wallowing, or raise himself from his horrible
position by an abuse of their honourable names.” To
“ G. R.” he says : “ I expect to shortly expose in a pamphlet
the revolting doctrines which you and Mr. Bradlaugh are
endeavouring to promoteand speaks of “ the atrocious
Elements of Social Science,’ which Mr. Bradlaugh has so
often and so loudly praised.”
Finally, in the last number of the National Reformer
which he was permitted to edit, he fills pages with extracts
from the book to prove what he had said of its horrible and
revolting character.
Later, in his own paper, Barker's Review, vol. i., p. 118,
he vigorously denounces the doctrines taught by Mr. Brad
laugh and the National Reformer, and points out that “ the
principle that the animal appetites should rule; that powerful
animal appetites are great virtues ; that there is no danger in
their free, unlimited indulgence, is represented by the author
of the loathsome publication in which this theory is taught
and defended, and by those who commend the work and aid
an its circulation.”
And in Barker s Review, vol. i., p. 170, he says: “Only
�20
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
one public man among the Secularists condemned the book
until we exposed it. It has been advertised, recommended,
and circulated by Secularist lecturers; its author almost
worshipped, and the moment a Secularist retracted his com
mendation of the work he was savagely assailed by the
editor of the National Reformer.”
It was in vain that Joseph Barker worked for the separa
tion of Freethought from immorality, and called his oppo
nents “ the unbounded license party.” The majority was
against him. Mr. Bradlaugh was consistent, and stands to
day where he did twenty years ago, with Mrs. Besant as hisfirst Vice-President of the National Secular Society, and the
eloquent defender of the doctrines denounced by Mr. Joseph
Barker, who had vainly tried to carry the morals of Methodism
into the advocacy of Secularism. From that day, up to a
recent period, during sixteen years, “ The Elements of Social
Science” was advertised in the then leading organ of
Secularism, and its principles advocated in its columns ; and;
in “The National Secular Society’s Almanack for 1878” I
find the following advertisement:—
LEMENTS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE; OR, Physical, Sexual,,
and Natural Religion. An Exposition of the True Cause
and Only Cure of the Three Primary Social Evils—Poverty, Prostitu
tion, and Celibacy. By a Doctor of Medicine. Sixteenth Edition.
Twenty-eighth Thousand.
E
Translations of this Work have been published in the following
languages:—
In French—Elements de Science Sociale.
In German—Die Grnndzilge der Gesellschafts-vissenschaft.
In Dutch—De Elementcn der Sociale Wetenschag.
In Italian—Elementi di Scienza Sociale.
In Portuguese—Elementos de Sciencia Social.
And among the “ Opinions of the Press ” we read :—
“ This is the only book, so far as we know, in which, at a cheap price
and with honest and pure intent and purpose, all the questions affecting
the sexes, and the influence of their relations on society, are plainly
dealt with. It has now been issued in French as well as in English,
and we bring the French edition to the notice of our friends of the In
ternational Working Men’s Association, and of our subscribers in France
and Belgium, as essentially a poor man’s book.”—National Reformer
edited by Mr. Charles Bradlaugh.
�BRADLAUGH’S QUARREL WITH JOSEPH BARKER.
21
The Medical Press and Circular says :—
“We are told that it has been largely read in London by medical
men.”
The Examiner, in one of its many phases, said :—■
“.This is’ we believe, the only book that has fully, honestly, and in
a scientific spirit, recognised all the elements of the problem, How are
mankind to triumph over poverty, with its train of attendant evils ? and
fearlessly endeavoured to find a practical solution.”
The Reasoner, edited by Mr. G. J. Holyoake, said:—
“ It is, in one sense, a book which it is a mercy to issue and courage
to publish.”
The Boston Investigator, the leading palaeo-Secularist paper
in America, says :—
“ We_ have never risen from the perusal of any work with greater
satisfaction.”
Italian and German Secularist writers even more emphati
cally commend it.
This book, “ The Elements of Social Science,” was thus
for years advertised, eulogised, and promoted by Mr. Brad
laugh. He has never, to my knowledge, withdrawn his
commendations or repudiated its teachings. It remains,
therefore, only necessary to show what are the doctrines of
the book, in order to show what are the social and moral,
beliefs of Mr. Charles Bradlaugh, M.P., etc.
�22
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
Chapter III.
SEXUAL RELIGION.
The religion of Palaeo-Secularism, as accepted and promul
gated by Mr. Bradlaugh and his associates, consists in the love
of the world and the worship of matter, and especially of the
human body. Thus, in this “ Bible of Secularism,” we have
sections on “ Natural Religion ” and “ Physical Religion
but nearly the whole book is occupied with teaching the
most important principle, or doctrines, of “Sexual Reli
gion.”
According to this religion, the chief end of man is to
glorify his animal desires, and, this being his only world and
only life, to have in it all possible sensual enjoyment. This
great duty of humanity is enforced as a matter of natural
religion, sexual religion, science, and philanthropy. It is
urged for physiological and pathological reasons, and recom
mended as a means of preserving health and of curing
disease.
The union of the sexes in marriage has been supposed by
moralists to have for its principal end the production of
offspring and the continuation of the human race on the
earth. ThePalaeo-Secularist Bible teaches an entirely different
doctrine. The great object of such intercourse is pleasure;
and the production of offspring is, beyond a very narrow
limit, an evil which it is our duty to avoid. Chastity, it
■contends, is a violation of natural law; continence is a
•crime ; marriage, so far as it limits or hampers the enjoyment
of the senses, is a superstitious and tyrannical institution;
fidelity is an evil; prostitution, as far as it goes, is a remedy
for bad institutions; but it may be abolished by the universal
acceptance of Palaeo-Secularist doctrines and practice as re
commended in “ The Elements of Social Science,” a book
which is so warmly commended and widely circulated among
Palaeo-Secularists all over the world, and especially by Charles
�SEXUAL RELIGION.
23
Bradlaugh and Annie Besant, who say, in the Publishers’
Preface to “The Fruits of Philosophy,” last edition, 1877 :
“ Physiology has made great strides during the past forty
years, and, not considering it right to circulate erroneous
physiology, we submitted the pamphlet to a doctor in whose
accurate knowledge we have the fullest confidence, and who
is widely known in all parts of the world as the author of
‘ The Elements of Social Science.’ The notes signed
‘ G. R.’ are written by this gentleman.” Thus it appears
that “ G. R.,” the annotator of “ The Fruits of Philo
sophy,” is the author of the Bible of Secularism, “The
Elements of Social Sciencewhile Dr. Drysdale, also
a distinguished physician, is President of the Malthusian
League, whose offices are’ those of the publishers of the
National Reformer and “The Fruits of Philosophy;” and
Mrs. Besant, first Vice-President of the National Secular
Society, is Hon. Secretary of the Malthusian League and
the author of “The Law of Population,” a pamphlet written
to take the place of the legally-condemned and rather obso
lete one of Dr. Knowlton, and which is intended to aid
people in carrying out more thoroughly the most important
duties of “ sexual religion,” as laid down in “ The Elements
of Social Science.”
I have stated briefly what these duties are. It is evident
that they are the exact opposites of the duties taught and
practised more or less by what are called respectable people.
Christians are supposed to renounce “ the world, the flesh,
and the devil;” Secularists, of “ The Elements ” type, glorify
the world; they teach the duty of revelling in sensuality, and,
rejecting all ideas of spiritual existence, they do not, of
course, believe in angels, good or bad.
It remains for us to show, by extracts from the book,
which contains the most comprehensive and authoritative
statements we can find of Mr. Bradlaugh’s doctrines respect
ing sexual morals," or “ sexual religion ”—a book so
thoroughly endorsed in the National Reformer that we have
not mis-stated nor over-stated the purport of such doctrines
as he so warmly approves, and mean to do simple justice in
this matter by giving the doctrines as set forth in the words
of the writer of “ The Elements of Social Science,” as well
as the reasons he gives for maintaining them.
This book, so highly commended by Mr. Bradlaugh—
�24
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
written by one of his most active partisans, as well as his
teacher in morals—holds that all men and all women should,
not only as a right, but as a duty, and as a religious duty
appertaining to “ sexual religion,” live in the free, full, fre
quent exercise of their sexual propensities. It teaches
as duties what moralists condemn as lust, and fornication,
and adultery. It teaches that continence and chastity, com
mended by others as virtues, are unnatural vices and deadly
-sins. It teaches the necessity, and therefore the right, of
marital infidelity and the duty of seduction. It defends
and honours prostitution, while it regards universal license
and promiscuity as a more natural and desirable condition.
These are the doctrines which some of the chosen, or self
appointed, leaders of the Palaeo-Secularist party have for many
years accepted and defended, and which they have pro
pagated in their far-reaching organisation.
It is probable that many Palaeo-Secularists will be disposed
to deny, and angrily resent, this indictment. I can sympathise
with them ; but I am obliged to do what is much worse than
to make such charges—I am obliged to prove them. To do
ihis I must give a few extracts from “ The Elements of
Social Science,” as Joseph Barker did twenty-four years ago
in his portion of the National Reformer, before he ceased to
be one of its editors.
Here, then, are the doctrines and morals set forth in a
book highly commended by Mr. Bradlaugh, M.P., circulated
wherever the English language is read, and translated into
the most important languages of Western Europe.
In the section on “ Sexual Religion : Laws of the Sexual
‘Organs,” it is stated that:—
“One physiological law of supreme importance and
“ universal application in our constitution is, that every
“ several member must, in order to be vigorous and
“ healthy, have a due amount of exercise, and that of the
“ normal kind. Thus the eye must have light, the limbs
“ motion, the intellect reflection, and our appetites and
“ passions their normal gratification, else will they infallibly
“ become enfeebled and diseased. Either excessive or
“ deficient exercise is injurious ; and, in order to have a
“ well-balanced bodily constitution (just as much our
“ honour and our duty as a well-balanced mind), we must
�SEXUAL RELIGION.
2$
“ obey this law. The generative organs are subject to it
“ as well as every other; and hence we shall see the duty
“ and necessity of their having due exercise from the time
“ of their maturity, which takes place at puberty, till that
“ of their decline ” (page 78).
“ Hence we must acknowledge that every man who has
“ not a due amount of sexual exercise lives a life of natural
“ imperfection and sin ; and he can never be certain how
“ far Nature’s punishment for this will proceed in his
“ case ” (p. 83).
“ The commonly-received code of sexual morality is
“ most erroneous, and erected in ignorance of, and opposi“ tion to, natural truth; the real natural duties of every
“ human being (however social difficulties may interfere
“ with the discharge of them) towards his reproductive
“ organs, and the passions connected with them, consisting
“ in their due and normal exercise, for which the social
“ provision of marriage is quite inadequate. Nature lays
“ one command on us : ‘ Exercise all thy functions, else
“art thou an imperfect and sinful being” (page 153).
“ It is absolutely certain that Nature meant the sexual
“ organs in either sex to have a due amount of exercise,
“ from the time of their maturity till their decline; and
“ no one who knows anything of the bodily laws can
“ doubt that every departure from the course she points
“ out is a natural sin; and she shows this herself by the
“ punishments she inflicts. She forms no organ that she
“ does not intend to be exercised, rouses no desires merely
“ to torment by their self-denial. It is not by shutting
“ our eyes to these facts that we can hope to progress
“ either in knowledge or in virtue” (page 163).
“ Chastity is considered one of the greatest of all virtues
“ in woman, and in man too, though in his case it is
“ practically less regarded. We have no longer voluntary
“ nuns, but of involuntary ones there are myriads_ far
( more, in reality, than ever existed in any Roman
“ Catholic country. Millions of women pass a great part
“of their sexual lives, and immense numbers pass the
“ whole, in total sexual abstinence, without any of the
“ enjoyments of sexual pleasures or the happiness of a
“ mother’s affections. For all this incredible self-denial,
“ which causes more anguish and disease than any mind
�-2 5
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
“can conceive, they have for their reward the barren
“ praise of chastity ” (page 162).
“Chastity, or complete sexual abstinence, so.far from
“ being a virtue, is invariably a great natural sin. We are
“ short-sighted beings, full of errors and false theories;
“ but Nature is absolutely unerring, and it is only by con“ suiting her that we can gain a true knowledge of our
“ virtues and vices. If we attend to Nature, we shall find
“ that all our organs are subject to the same law of health;
“ the great law of normal and sufficient exercise. There
“ is no organ in our body, nor any faculty in our mind,
“ which, to be healthy (or, in other words, virtuous), does
“ not require its due share of appropriate exercise. The
“ sexual organs are subject to this law exactly as all others;
“ and, whatever theories we form about them, Nature in
variably rewards or punishes them, according as the
“.'conditions of their health are observed. She cares not
“ for our moral code ; marriage has nothing sacred in her
■“eyes; with or without marriage, she gives her seal of
“ approbation to the sexually virtuous man or woman in a
“ healthy and vigorous state of the sexual organs and
“appetites, while she punishes the erring by physical and
“moral sufferings ” (p. 162).
“The two natures [of man and woman] are built on
“ the same original model, and, in the main, they are alike
“ in their laws. The great law of exercise of every part
■“ applies equally to both sexes; and in woman, as in
“ man, physical strength is more virtuous than weakness;
■“ courage than timidity; nervous power than nervous
“debility; and it is a sign of an effeminate and un“ natural theory of life that these truths are not deeply
“ felt by all of us ” (p. 163).
“ We may do what we please in the way of other healthy
“ influences ; we may bestow every other care on the
“ nurture and education of our beloved ones; but it is
“ absolutely impossible to make women healthy or happy
“without a due amount of sexual enjoyment” (p. 175).
“ When the universal applicability of the great law of
“ exercise to all our organs is understood, every one will
“ perceive that he is morally bound to exercise duly his
“ sexual organs throughout the period of sexual life. Thus
“ the young man, on entering upon puberty, will feel that
�SEXUAL RELIGION.
27
“ Nature commands him to indulge, to a moderate extent,
“ his sexual desires; and, when once he is fully convinced
“ of the natural rectitude of this, he cannot fail to perceive“ the insufficiency and unnatural character of our moral
“ code ” (p. 176).
We need not extend these quotations, which cover the
whole ground of sexual morality as taught by the highest
Malthusian authority, and as accepted and taught by pro
minent Secularist leaders. The book from which they are
taken is to be found in most Secularist libraries, and it isread in six languages.
�28
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
Chapter IV.
THE NEO-MALTHUSIAN DOCTRINE OF
MARRIAGE.
Marriage, according to the principles laid down in the
preceding chapter, is an unnatural institution, a hateful
monopoly, a delusion and a snare. The one fact of a large
surplus female population is, with Palaeo-Secularistic Malthusians, sufficient to condemn monogamic marriage. Polygamy
would be a partial remedy for that evil; but in other
countries, and in all new colonies, there is a surplus male
population—sometimes a very large one—whose require
ments are to be provided for, which would introduce the oppo
site institution of Polyandry, said to exist in Thibet, where
one woman is married to several husbands. The only other
resources are prostitution, as it exists in nearly all com
munities, or general promiscuous intercourse, such as is
advocated by the author of “ The Elements.” He is too
scientific, in his way—too logical, and too honestly out
spoken, to leave us in any doubt on a matter of such im
portance. He sees clearly that “Sexual Religion,” as he
preaches it, cannot be practised with the existence of legal
marriage. This is a clear deduction from his “ Law of
Exercise;” but it is enforced, as we shall see in another
chapter, by reasons drawn from what he considers medical
science.
In “The Elements of Social Science” (department of
“ Sexual Religion ”) we read :—
“ Many of the sexual evils most widely spread among
“ us depend directly upon the errors of our code of sexual
“morality. According to this code, all love except
“married love is considered sinful. Marriage, it is held,
“ moreover, should bind people together for life, without
“ leaving them the power of indulging in any other sexual
“ intimacy, or of divorce from each other, unless either
�THE NEO-MALTHUSIAN DOCTRINE OF MARRIAGE.
29
“ the husband or wife commits adultery. If this, which
“ is the view of marriage generally entertained in this
“country, were to continue, there are very many fearful
“ sexual evils which could not be removed. In the first
“place, what is, or should be, the grand object of any
“social institution for uniting the sexes? It is, that each
“ individual in society, every man and woman, should have
“ a fair share of the blessings of love and of offspring, and
“ that the children should be duly provided for. But, if
“ marriage be the only honourable way of obtaining sexual
“and parental pleasures, very many must be excluded
“ from them; for, even supposing that there were room
“ for the exercise of all the reproductive powers, as in
“ America, or that, by preventive intercourse, the propor“ tion of children in each family were to be small, so as
“ to allow of a great many marriages, still there would be
“ a large number of women, and even of men, who, from
“ plainness and other unattractive qualities, would find no
“ one who would be willing to be rigidly bound to them
“for life” (p. 356).
“ The irrevocable nature of the marriage contract, and
“ the impossibility of procuring divorce, lead to the most
“fearful evils. Mr. Hill shows this in his work on
“ ‘ Crime,’ telling us that the great majority of murders
“ and brutal assaults now-a-days are committed by
“ husbands upon their wives, and showing that it is in the
* nature of all long and indissoluble contracts to cause
similar evils. All contracts binding two human beings
“ together in an indissoluble manner for long periods are
“the fruitful source of crimes and miseries............. The
“ custom, moreover, of selecting one sole object of love,
“steeling one’s heart, as far as sexual desires are con“ cerned, against all the rest of man or womankind, has a
“ very narrowing effect on our capacity for affection and
“ appreciation of what is good and amiable in the different
“ characters we see around us. Hence, in great measure,
has arisen that fastidiousness in love which is so marked
“ among us, and is the sign of a narrow and effeminate
“ culture ” (p. 358).
The great natural sexual duties of man and woman
“ do not, as is commonly imagined, consist in being a
“constant husband or wife, or in avoiding unmarried
�3°
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
“ intercourse, but are of a very different nature. It is of
“ the highest importance that the attention of all of us
“ should be steadfastly concentrated upon the real sexual
“ duties, and not dazzled by mere names. Marriage
"■diverts our attention from the real sexual duties, and
“ this is one of its worst effects ” (p. 363).
“ Every individual man or woman is bound to exercise
“duly his sexual organs, so that the integrity of his own
“ health shall not be impaired on the one hand, and so
“ that he shall not, on the other, interfere with the health
“and happiness of his neighbour.
Every individual
“ should make it his conscientious aim that he or she
“ should have a sufficiency of love to satisfy the sexual
“demands of his nature, and that others around him
“should have the same. It is impossible, as has been
“ shown before, that each individual should have this in
“ an old country, unless by the use of preventive means.
“ The use of these means, therefore, comes to be incum" bent upon all those who seek to enjoy the natural
“ pleasures of love themselves without depriving their
“neighbours of them ” (p. 366).
“ It is absolutely impossible to have a free, sincere, and
“dignified sexual morality in our society as long as
“marriage continues to be the only honourable provision
“ for the union of the sexes, and as long as the marriage
“ bond is so indissoluble as at present............ It is only by
“ relaxing the rigour of the marriage bond, and allowing
“greater sexual freedom, that it is possible to eradicate
“prostitution, and with it venereal disease” (p. 368).
“ Now, in reality, facility of divorce does away with
“ marriage ; it thoroughly alters the theory of the institu“ tion, and makes it in reality nothing more than an agree“ ment between two people to live together as man and
“ wife, so long as they love each other. And such is the
“ only true mode of sexual union; it is the one which
“ Nature points out to us; and we may be certain that
“ any institution which defies the natural laws of love, as
“ marriage does, will be found to be the cause of immense
“ evils; ever accumulating as the world rolls on, and man“kind become more free and more enlightened in the
“physical and moral laws of their being............. Let
“those who will marry; but those who do not wish
�THE NEO-MALTHUSIAN DOCTRINE OF MARRIAGE.
31
“ to enter upon so indissoluble a contract, either on
“ account of their early age, or from a disapproval of the
“ whole ceremony, should deem it perfectly honourable
“and justifiable to form a temporary connection” (p. 371).
“ As I have already endeavoured to show, the present
“ system of prostitution and indissoluble marriage (which
“ are closely connected together), might be, or ought to
“ be, superseded by preventive intercourse, and by a re
laxation of the marriage code, when the diseases of
“ abstinence and abuse might not only be satisfactorily
“ treated, but effectually prevented ” (p. 504).
“ The noblest sexual conduct, in the present state of
“ society, appears to me to be that of those who, while
“ endeavouring to fulfil the real sexual duties, enumerated
“ in a former essay, live together openly and without dis“ guise, but refuse to enter into an indissoluble contract
“of which they conscientiously disapprove ” (p. 504.)
It is needless to multiply quotations on this point, for the
whole science and logic of the book are utterly irreconcil
able with the institution of marriage ; so that this book, so
highly commended by Mr. Bradlaugh, M P., in its chapters
on “ Sexual Religion,” is a protest and a conspiracy against
it; and, if the teachings of “ The Elements of Social
Science ” are carried into practice, marriage, as commonly
understood, becomes impossible.
�32
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
Chapter V.
PAL^O-SECULAR VIEWS OF SOCIAL EVILS.
Let it be understood that I do not impeach the motives of
the author of “The Elements of Social Science.” No
doubt he would abolish marriage and chastity, and what
men have for so many ages called purity and virtue, for what
he believes to be the best interests of humanity.
The author of “ The Elements ” is earnestly, and even
pathetically, philanthropic. In the last paragraph of the
book he says:—
“ It is not for myself that I ask consideration; it is for
“ the unfortunate sufferers to whom this work is devoted,
“and for whose benefit I would readily submit to any
“ amount of obloquy—even from those I wish to serve.
“ Alas ! when I see around me the poor perishing in their
“ squalid homes, the forsaken prostitutes wandering in our
“streets, the sexual victims pining in solitude and bitter“ ness; when I look down into the fearful abyss of our social
“ miseries and wrongs, and think, moreover, of the mutual
“ destruction by which all this suffering is attended, the
“reflection overpowers me—that it matters little what
“ becomes of myself. What am I better than they that
“ I should be happy when so many are miserable ? If I
“ can help my suffering fellow-men, it is the dearest wish
“of my heart—that for which I live—that for which
“I would willingly die; if not, I am indifferent to
“ my own fate. But I have a deep and abiding convic“ tion that these evils are not insuperable ; that the future
“ of our race will be brighter than the past; and that what
“ I have written has not been written in vain ” (p. 592).
In another place he says :—
“Morality, medicine, religion, law, politics are solemn
�PAL7E0-SECULAR VIEWS OF SOCIAL EVILS.
33
“ farces played before the eyes of men, whose imposing
“ pomps and dazzling ceremonies serve but to divert the
“ attention from the awful tragedies behind the scenes.
“ We may be absolutely certain of this, that, unless we can
“attain to some other solution of the social difficulties,
“our society must for ever continue, as it ever has been,
“a chaos of confusion, of wrongs, and of misery.”
The ground he takes in regard to our great social evil,
prostitution, proves his humanity, as the whole book does
his sincerity. He regrets its evils, he mourns over its
degradation, he pities its victims, but thinks “ the life of
voluntary celibacy led by these ladies ”—who try to reform
prostitutes—“ quite as sinful a one as that of the prostitutes
they endeavour to convert,” and asks :—
‘In what light, then, is prostitution to be regarded
“ when we take into consideration the great primary
“ necessity of sexual intercourse ? It should be regarded
“as a valuable temporary substitute for a better state of
“ things. It is greatly preferable to no sexual intercourse
“ at all, without which, as has been shown, every man and
“ woman must lead a most unnatural life. Therefore, the
“ deep gratitude of mankind, instead of their scorn, is
“ due, and will be given in future times, to those unfortu“ nate females who have suffered in the cause of our sexual
“nature. We shall find that, if we love and reverence
“these girls (at the same time that we endeavour totally
“ to remove from our society the fearful evil of prostitu“ tion), they will love and reverence us, and on no other
“consideration. If Society enfold them in her bosom,
“ they will soon learn gratefully to repay her love; but,
“if she continue to spurn them, her punishments and
“ sufferings will be no less than theirs. Her unnatural
“ treatment has made them so degraded, and from that
“ degradation only her repentant love and reverence will
“uplift them” (p. 270).
In the present social state, the only resource of a young
man, he says, is one of three necessary evils, of which mer
cenary love is the least. But—
“ Mercenary love, besides the fearful dangers of venereal
�34
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
“ disease, is exceedingly degrading; and the amount of
“ evil done to men, as well as to women, by this general
“ degradation of their first sexual experiences is little con“ceived. The young woman is in a much worse sexual
“ position than even the young man, for even mercenary
“love is far better than total sexual abstinence” (p. 239).
Here, as elsewhere, our author seems content to make
woman the victim of what he considers the necessities of
man ; but the social system he advocates would make men
and women equal, and there is, from his point of view, both
justice and good feeling in the following observations :—
“ Clandestine love fills the whole of society with deceit
“ and suspicion ; every one suspects his neighbour, and is
“in his turn the object of suspicion ; and even were there
“ no other obstacles to the elevation of the human cha
racter, this alone, as long as it continues to exist, must
“ be fatal to the hopes of the moralist.
“ But, if man be placed in so humiliating a position in
“ sexual matters, unfortunate woman is infinitely more so.
“ In the first place, we have the vast multitude of
'•'■prostitutes, on whose awful degradation one cannot think
“ but with dismay and anguish. That there should be
“among us a class of unfortunate women, who are
“ treated worse than dogs; who are hunted about by the
“ police, despised and abhorred by their own sex, and
“abused and neglected by man, to whose wants they
“minister, is a page of human shame too dark for tears.
“ It is the greatest disgrace of civilised society—a dis“ grace deeper even than negro slavery. And for what
“are these poor girls hunted down in this merciless
“ manner ? In truth, for acting exactly the same way as
“ all of us—as all young men, who go with them, enjoy
“ ourselves with them, and then desert them, and leave
“ them to their fate; for supplying a want in our society,
“ which man, by the necessities of his nature, cannot do
“ without, and which only they, who know little of human
“nature, imagine may be withheld without the most de“ structive consequences. Instead of contempt, these
“poor neglected girls deserve the warmest thanks of
“ society, for the heroic mode in which they have borne
�PAL7E0-SECULAR VIEWS OF SOCIAL EVILS.
35
“ the misery and the burden of our shame. Notwith“ standing the enormous evils which they aid in causing,
“ they have been in the main exceedingly serviceable to
“ mankind, by palliating in some degree the other alter“ native evils of the law of population—namely, sexual
“ abstinence or premature death; and thus, as already
“ mentioned, they should be regarded as sexual martyrs.
“ If youth is to be humiliated and disgraced for indul“ ging in sexual intercourse, at least let all of us bear our
“ share, and be ashamed to throw the whole burden on
“ poor helpless woman. While so glaring an injustice
“ exists, how can we talk of the nobility or dignity of
“ man ? In truth, no one member of the human family,
“ no prostitute nor criminal, can be degraded, without
“ dragging down all the rest. In the case of prostitution
“ the whole of society is concerned in it. Men, it may be
“ said, are as a general rule all prostitutes ; for there are
“ but an inconsiderable section of them who do not
“ indulge more or less at some period of life in mercenary
“ loves, and it matters little in such a case whether the
“ money be given or received. The general character of
“ woman also is exceedingly debased, and their dignity
“ and freedom lessened, by the existence of such a class
“among their sex” (p. 409.)
He feels deeply and he complains bitterly of this unnatural
state of things, and says :—
“ As long as the present sexual system lasts there is no
“ such thing as a dignified life for youth. Mercenary
“ love, in itself, is an abomination, utterly abhorrent to
“Nature, and full of degradation to all concerned in
“it........... In fact, in all sexual intercourse, except in
“ marriage, the young man has to act and feel like a pick“ pocket, shunning the light, and being for ever on his
“guard against discovery ; and it can readily be perceived
“ what an effect this must have in degrading his character”
(p. 407).
Condemning prostitution as abominable, utterly abhorrent
to nature, full of degradation, our philosopher can still look
upon prostitutes as heroic martyrs, who “deserve the
�36
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
warmest thanks of society.” But a scientific philanthropist
can look charitably even upon what are called unnatural
vices. He says:—
“All these vices have met with an opprobrium far
*
“ greater than they deserved ; for the public mind loses all
“ sense of justice when it comes to consider a sexual fault,
“and is always far too harsh in its judgments. I should
“ say that, of all acts, none are viewed with such unjust
“ severity as these unnatural vices........... As long as the
“present obstacles continue to the gratification of the
“ normal desires ; as long as all unmarried love is regarded
“ in a harsh and degrading light, so long will prostitution
“ and unnatural vices flourish, and it will be out of human
“ power to suppress them ” (p. 249).
The present obstacles to perfection are the institution of
marriage and the common ideas and feelings opposed to
universal license and promiscuity. The great evil—almost
the only evil in the world—is the repression of what Chris
tian moralists call licentiousness. The greatest good possible
for humanity would be the removal of all such prejudices
and restrictions, so that prostitution, shameful, unnatural,
abhorrent as it is, is to be preferred to civilised morality;
and our author says :—
“ As long, however, as prostitution continues to be, in
“ many cases, the only attainable intercourse, although I
“ deeply deplore its existence, it seems to me a far smaller
“ evil that a man should indulge in it than that he should
“ waste away under the miseries and evils of abstinence
“ or unnatural and diseasing abuses.”
In a word, the “ social evil ” is to be tolerated, and even
cherished, until women generally become so far Malthusianised—or, may I say, Bradlaughised ?—as to make it no longer
a necessary evil.
�PALAEO-SECULAR MEDICINE.
37
Chapter VI.
PAL^EO-SECULAR MEDICINE.
It could not be expected that a “ Graduate of Medicine ”
would write a book upon “ The Elements of Social Science
and Sexual Religion ” without treating largely of the diseases
which are caused by civilised morality, and are to be cured
by the opposite system, accepted, adopted, and recommended
by the partisans of the seatless M.P. What are called the
sexual diseases of men and women are, therefore, described
at length; but it is not necessary that we should enter into
these unpleasant professional details. It will be sufficient to
show that, according to this author, all these diseases have
their origin in the one evil of sexual restraint or chastity,
and their one cure is sexual license.
Writing of “Hysteria,” the author of the “Elements”
says :—
“ Chastity or sexual abstinence causes more real disease
‘‘and misery in one year, I believe, in this country than
‘‘sexual excesses in a century. We must not include
‘‘venereal disease among the evils of excess, as it has
“ nothing to do with it; it depends always on infection,
“not on over-use of the sexual organs ” (p. 186).
“Woman’s peculiar torments begin at puberty, and
“ from that time, in innumerable cases, till her marriage,
“ she is the constant prey of anxiety. Ungratified desires
“ distract her, endless temptations and excitements
“surround her, marriage is for her so critical a step, and
“ yet she has not the power of selection. The fatal ques
tion, Shall she be married at all? gradually dawns
“ upon her, and the clouds and whirlwinds of anxious
‘‘and conflicting passions darken her sky............ The only
“ one who can cure a hysterical young woman is a young
‘‘ man whom she loves, and with whom she may gratify
“ her natural feelings, and have a free and happy outlet
�38
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
“ for the emotions which have been so long disordering
“her” (p. 183).
“ I am convinced,” says this high medical authority, “ that,
if sexual intercourse were used early enough in these diseases
[mentioning some to which young girls are liable], very few
cases would exsist ” (p. 172).
Treating of “ Chlorosis,” a disease of girls, he says :—
“ The crippling idea of chastity and female decorum
“ binds her like an invisible chain, wherever she moves,
“ and prevents her from daring to think, feel, or act, freely
“and impulsively........... If we examine into the origin and
“ meaning of these singular ideas with regard to woman,
“we shall find that they are based upon no natural distinc
tion between the two sexes, but upon the erroneous
“ views of man, and especially upon the mistaken ideas as
“to the virtue of female chastity. It is to guard this
“ supposed virtue that all the restrictions on female liberty
“ and female development in body and mind have arisen.
“........... Society is itself to blame for all such errors as
“unnatural sexual indulgences in either sex. Until we
“ can supply to the violent sexual passions of youth a
“ proper and natural gratification, we may be absolutely
“certain that an unnatural one will be very frequently
“resorted to............ The only true and permanent remedy
“is a proper amount of sexual exercise” (pp. 167-171).
Of course, the same remedy is prescribed in diseases of a
similar character in men, and there is no doubt that this kind
of practice has spread to a considerable extent in the medical
profession, and that—
“It is now comparatively common among our most
“skilful medical men to recommend sexual intercourse to
“young men suffering from genital debility.”
With them there is little difficulty in carrying out such a
prescription; with women it is different. Our author says :—
“ But for suffering woman no one has yet raised his
“ voice, no one has applied to her case the only true and
“scientific remedy; that remedy which is the keystone of
�PALJEO-SECULAR MEDICINE.
39
“ female therapeutics, and without which all treatment or
“ prevention of female disease is a vanity and a delusion.
“ The great mass of female sexual diseases, even more than
“ those of men, arise from sexual enfeeblement, consequent
“ on the want of a healthy and sufficient exercise for this
“important part of the system. From the want of this,
“the green sickness, menstrual irregularities, hysterical
“ affections without number, proceed; and it is utter
“ vanity to expect to cure, and still more to prevent, these
“ miserable diseases, without going to the root of the
“ matter. It is a certain and indubitable fact that, unless
“ we can supply to the female organs their proper natural
“ stimulus, and a healthy and natural amount of exercise,
“ female disease will spring up on every side around us,
“ and all other medical appliances will be powerless against
“ the hydra ” (p. 163).
But, in addition to the slavery of one sex to prejudices
and superstitions about chastity, virtue, and morality, there
are still but comparatively few physicians who have the
science and the courage to make the proper prescription :—
“ How few English physicians are there who have the
“ courage, even if they have the knowledge, to prescribe—
“ nay, even to tell the patient of this one and only physio
logical remedy! No; overawed by the general erro“ neous moral views on these subjects, they shrink from
“ their duty of asserting the sacredness of the bodily laws
“ in opposition to all preconceptions ” (p. 81).
In some cases physicians advise marriage; but how seldom
can such advice be taken! What man or woman would
wish to be administered in that way as a remedy for disease ?
Our author sees and admits the difficulty. He says :—
“ Marriage deserts us at our greatest need; and, if it
“ should continue to be the only attainable sexual inter“ course, the cure of vast numbers of genital diseases
“ would be, as at present, impossible, and might be given
“ up in despair. But not only the cure, the prevention of
“ these diseases in any satisfactory degree would be
“ impossible; for, unless all young people were to marry
�40
,
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
“ about puberty, which would create the most fearful sub“ sequent repentances, an immense amount of genital
“ disease would be certain to arise, were no other honour“ able provision made for the gratification of the first and
“ most impetuous passions. It is very generally about and
“shortly after the age of puberty that masturbation
“ begins to be practised among both sexes; chlorosis is
“ most frequent in girls still in their teens ; in short, it is
“ an absolute impossibility to prevent the development of
“ an immense amount of genital disease and morbidity if
“ marriage be the only sexual provision for youth.”
The sole alternative, as we shall see more fully stated later
on, is to abolish marriage, and adopt universal promiscuous
intercourse.
Treating of “ Dysmenorrhoca,” our author, after prescrib
ing his panacea, says : —
“ To prevent this disease, we must endeavour to eradicate
“ throughout society the causes which lead to it. Of
“these by far the most important is sexual abstinence...
“....... And I believe that by far the most important class
“ of sexual diseases are those which arise from sexual
“abstinence or abuse, and which are characterised by
“ genital enfeeblement, giving rise to general debility and
“ mental irritation, discontent, and despondency. These
“are universally spread throughout our society in the
“present day, and spring naturally from the universal
“ difficulties opposing the healthy exercise of the sexual
“ organs” (p. 238).
Young men suffering from a very common form of nervous
exhaustion are advised to use “ the natural remedy ” very
moderately at first—once a week or so—gradually increasing
with the waxing powers (p. 105).
I regret the necessity of entering into these particulars,
but can see no other way of bringing this very important
subject to the attention of thoughtful men and women. It
is right that fathers and mothers should know what kind of
advice such a “ Graduate of Medicine,” and all who may
agree with him, may give their sons and daughters, and it is
right that society should know what kind of medical doc
�PAL2E0-SECULAR MEDICINE.
41
trines are approved and widely promulgated by those who
sympathise with the author of this book, and those who
have done most to aid its circulation. But for the fact that
this book, from which I have so liberally quoted, solely
because I do not wish to do any injustice to its distinguished
author, or his more distinguished or better known patrons
and supporters, has been and is a recognised text-book of a
great movement, or one branch of a growing organisation, I
might have hesitated to lay such doctrines or such opinions,
claiming to be scientific and medical, before the possible
readers of these pages. But since I have decided that it is
best that the real facts of life should be known—whether of
the slums investigated by Royal Commissions, or the moral
slums of false science and false philosophy, I think it right
to give the author’s defence of what most men, and, one
may hope, nearly all women, will consider horrible doctrines.
It is also but just to the unseated member for Northampton,
who has so long and steadfastly stood by the book and worked
with its author, who was, it will be remembered, the profes
sional endorser and friendly annotator of “ The Fruits of
Philosophy,” published by Mr. Bradlaugh and Mrs. Besant.
The author of the “ Elements ” says :—
“ Every act of every organ is essentially good. This
“ law applies exactly in the same way to all the intellectual
u and moral operations ; every thought and feeling of the
“ mind must, by the necessity of our being, tend to the
“ preservation, and not to the destruction, of the organism,
“ and therefore must be in like manner essentially
“good ” (p. 415).
“ In health and disease,” he says, “ this is alike true
so that it is impossible for a man to think a bad thought or
do a bad act.
All thought and all action is the result of material forces,
which can, of course, have no moral character. He says :—
“ Matter, when in the form of a muscle, can contract;
“ when in the form of living nervous substance, it can
■“ think. Thought is, in some mysterious manner, con“ nected with phosphorus, and must, in some way or other,
“ be an exaltation and refinement of properties naturally
�42
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
“ inherent in that substance and in the other elements of
“ the brain, but in what way is yet totally unknown. On
“ reflection, we perceive that, as there is a chemical action
“ attending every mental process, just as there is one
“ attending every act of life, every change in the mind
“ must be connected with an exactly corresponding change
“ in these chemical actions ” (p. 440).
Certainly no one would think of attributing free will,
responsibility, and morality, or immorality, to chemical com
binations ; and here is the whole philosophy of Materialism.
There is no longer any question of morality, since morality
cannot exist.
Mr. G. J. Holyoake, a less logical Materialist than the
“Graduate of Medicine,” admits accountability for the
operations of phosphorus, carbon, and oxygen, but limits
it. He says (“ Principles of Secularism ”): “ No man or
woman is accountable to others for any conduct by which
others are not injured or damaged.” As it must be difficult
to determine when or how much others are injured by our
acts, this rule is not easy of application; and it clearly
denies the right of interference with any act whose conse
quences may be supposed to be confined to the individual,
as suicide or murder; since it cannot be certainly proved,
according to palaeo-Secularist principles, that for a man to
hasten his own annihilation can be an evil to society ; while it
may be a decided benefit; and the “ painless extinction ” of
the lives of others might be, under conceivable circumstances,
a mercy to them and a favour to the community. In any
case, it would only interrupt unpleasant chemical action.
The action of phosphorus, according to the author of
“ The Elements,” has hitherto been very unfortunate. He
says :—
“When we look around us among our friends and
“ acquaintances we can scarcely find a single individual
“whose life we could call a happy one. For my part, I
“ do not think that I know in this country a single such
“ case, and I have heard the same opinion from others.
“ All of us are worn by anxiety, and depressed by the
“ atmosphere of misery that overspreads our society........
“ Hitherto all happiness has been built on the misery of
�PAOEO-SECULAR MEDICINE.
43
“ others. No man at present can be happy himself without
“inevitably causing his neighbour’s misery” (p. 335).
The remedy for this miserable condition of the chemicals
by whose reactions we think, feel, and suffer we have given
in abundant extracts from the palaeo-Secularist’s text-book and
Materialist’s vade mecum. It consists in unbounded freedom
of “ Sexual Religion,” and the artificial prevention of its
natural consequences—only a very slight interference with
the chemical operations of phosphorus, carbon, etc.; for
he says:—
“ An increase of sexual connections is, indeed, in itself,
“ one of the greatest blessings; but it is only a subject
“ for true and unqualified congratulation when it is not
“ followed by a corresponding increase of offspring ”
(p. 481).
Mrs. Besant, the present shining light of Bradlaughism,
though a devout believer in “The Elements,” whose
doctrines she has written a special pamphlet to promote,
attributes the miseries of human life to that peculiar result
of the operations of phosphorus and other chemicals called
Christianity. In No. 10 of the National Secular Society’s
tracts, “The Fruits of Christianity,” which are “black,
bitter, and poisonous,” she says: “How Christianity has
darkened the innocent brightness of the world is known to
■every student. Roman Catholic Christianity made a miser
able life a holy life, but was content to leave it to the
religious only: Protestant Christianity forced it on all
alike. The Swiss Calvinists set the example of austerity,
and the French Huguenots quickly followed. They forbade
theatres, private theatricals, dancing, gay dresses, conjuring,
puppet shows, etc., making gloom synonymous with piety.
In Scotland the Protestants made the Sunday a misery.”
And she quotes Buckle as saying of them : “ Men, in their
daily actions, and in their very looks, became troubled,
melancholy, and ascetic. Their countenance soured, and
was downcast. Not only their opinions, but their gait, their
demeanour, their voice, their general aspect, were influenced
by that deadly blight which nipped all that was genial and
warm........... Thus it was that the national character of the
�44
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
Scotch was, in the seventeenth century, dwarfed and muti
lated.” Astounding effects of chemical reactions, natural
selection, and the survival of the fittest! and only to be
remedied by joining the National Secular Society and the
Malthusian League, sending Mr. Bradlaugh to Parliament,
and making a diligent study of “ The Elements ” and Mrs
Besant’s “ Law of Population.”
�THE PAUEO-SECULARIST MALTHUSIANS.
45
Chapter VII.
THE PAL/EO-SECULARIST MALTHUSIANS.
Mr. Malthus was a respectable English clergyman, who
thought that there was a danger that the population of a
country might increase faster than its supply of food, and
he proposed that people should prevent the calamity of
having more children than they could take care of by avoid
ing early marriages.
As a matter of fact, the people of several European coun
tries do postpone marriage from prudential motives, and,
in England, while the lower classes in towns marry at twenty,
in the upper ranks the average age at marriage is about thirty.
The calculations and warnings of Malthus made some
excitement in his time, and his ideas were adopted by James
Mill, John Stuart Mill, and other political economists, and
also by Richard Carlile and some Socialist writers. Some of
these were not, however, content with the prudential checks
to population of late marriages, or of married people living
in continence, to limit the number of their children; and
they recommended the use of certain methods for preventing
pregnancy. Some went further and advocated infanticide, or
what was called the “ painless extinction” of every unwelcome
babe at the moment of its birth. There is no doubt that,
more or less in consequence of such teachings, a vast
number of children have been wilfully murdered; as a vast
number are also dying continually of unsanitary conditions
and parental neglect.
The Population Question, as it is called, has been taken
up by the leading Cat-and-Ladleites, and they have generally
advocated “ preventive intercourse ” in preference to late
marriages or married abstinence. Carlile in his “ Every
Woman’s Book,” Robert Dale Owen in his “ Moral Physio
logy, ” Dr. Knowlton in his “ Fruits of Philosophy,” the
�46
SEXUAL ECONOMY
“ Graduate of Medicine ” in his “ Elements of Social
Science,”' and Mrs. Besant in her “ Law of Population,”
have all taken the same ground—the dangers of too great
and rapid an increase of population, and the necessity of
finding some check; and they have adopted some mechani
cal or chemical method of preventing conception.
After Richard Carlile, Watson, a Secularist publisher, sold
“ The Fruits of Philosophy,” which was also sold by the
Holyoakes, and by Charles Watts until his prosecution,
when it was taken up by Mr. Bradlaugh and Mrs. Besant.
But the great authority accepted by nearly all the Secu
larist leaders is the book from which I have made so many
extracts. The “ Graduate of Medicine ” is a thorough
Malthusian ; only he rejects Malthus’s remedy for over-popu
lation. He is not in favour of late marriages—he prefers
that people should not marry at all; but he is in favour of
perpetual and limitless licentiousness, and of preventing its
natural result. Here is the case as he puts it over and over
again, with all his force and eloquence:—
It is absolutely necessary to health and happiness that
every male and female should have frequent sexual inter
course, from the age of puberty as long as the propensity
exists.
It is absolutely necessary that the number of children
born should be limited to the supply of food.
Therefore, it is absolutely necessary to prevent the natural
result of sexual indulgence.
Granting the premises, it is impossible to arrive at any
other conclusion.
Let us give the concise statement in his own words :—
“ The Law of Exercise. The health of the reproduc“ tive organs and emotions depends on their having a suffi“ cient amount of normal exercise ; and the want of this
“ tends powerfully to produce misery and disease in both
“ man and woman.
“ The Law of Fecundity. Each woman tends to pro“ duce from ten to fifteen children or thereabouts.
“ The Lazo of Agricultural Industry, or Diminishing
“ Productiveness. The proportional returns to agriculture
“ tend to diminish. In other words, the produce of the
“soil tends to increase in a less proportion than the labour
“ bestowed on it.
�THE PAUEO-SECULARIST MALTHUSIANS.
47
“ From these three laws arise—
“ The Law of Population, or Malthusian Law. The
“ natural increase of population has always been, and
“ will always continue to be, most powerfully checked in
“ all old countries, and in new colonies also, as soon as
“ their cultivation has reached a certain extent, by Celibacy
“ (that is, Sexual Abstinence), Prostitution, Sterility, Pre
ventive Intercourse, or Premature Death, whose collec“ tive amount varies inversely in proportion to the rapidity
“ with which the population of the country is increasing,
“ and to the number of emigrants minus that of immi“ grants ; while the amount of each individually varies
“ inversely in proportion to the others.
“ From these laws arise two duties—
“ The Duty of Limited Procreation. In an old country
“ it is the duty of every individual, whatever be his or
“ her station in life, to bring into the world only a very
“ small number of children.
“ The Duty of Sexual Lntercourse. It is the duty of
“ every individual to exercise his or her sexual functions
“ during the period of sexual life, abstinence and excess
“ being alike avoided ” (p. 558).
This is, briefly stated, the doctrine of the book which has
been, and is, accepted by the Palaeo-Secularist leaders, and
we may fairly conclude is approved by the great body of their
followers; for this is the doctrine set forth in the speeches
of Mr. Bradlaugh and Mrs. Besant, with great ability and
eloquence, in our courts of justice and in their lectures to
crowded houses in the principal towns in Great Britain.
After giving an abstract of the essay of Malthus on
“ Population ” in “ The Elements,” the author says
“Thus finishes this wonderful essay, the most im
“portant contribution to human knowledge, it appears
“ to me, that ever was made. On rising from it, with a
“ mind overpowered by the vastness of the subject, and
“ the incomparable way in which it has been treated, I
“ cannot but consider its author to have been the greatest
“ benefactor of mankind, without any exception, that ever
“existed on this earth” (p. 315).
�4«
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
Describing the evils of poverty, he can find but one
remedy:—
“ Poverty is a sexual evil, depending on a sexual cause,
“ and admitting only of a sexual cure ” (p. 484).
“ If the proportion of the people to the food can be
“made a smaller one, poverty will be benefited [pre
sented?], but by no other conceivable means. The
“ only possible way to remove poverty is to have fewer
“children” (p. 341).
Admiring Malthus as he does, the author condemns his
advice in regard to marriage ; besides, there is a vast number
of women for whom marriage is impossible :—
“ In some parts of England, and in many counties in
“ Scotland, the proportion of spinsters is as high as forty“ one per cent, of the women, from the age of twenty
“upwards. There are 1,407,225 women between the
“ ages of twenty and forty who have never married, and
“359,969 old maids of the age of forty and upwards.
“ Those who are at all aware of the misery and disease of
“ sexual abstinence will be able to form a slight idea of
“ the suffering arising from this form of the preventive
“check” (p. 343).
“ The great error in Mr. Malthus’s reasoning was that
“ he, like most of the moralists of his and our own age,
“was unaware of the frightful evils and fearful natural sin
“ of sexual abstinence. The ignorance of the necessity of
“ sexual intercourse to the health and virtue of both man
“ and woman is the most fundamental error in medical
“ and moral philosophy ” (p. 345).
Here, as in every instance, the italics are those of the
author.
“ There is a way, and but one possible way, of sur“ mounting these evils and of securing for each individual
“ among us a fair share of food, love, and leisure, without
“ which human society is a chaotic scene of selfishness,
“injustice, and misery” (p. 347).
“ The means I speak of—the only means by which the
�THE PAL7E0-SECULARIST MALTHUSIANS.
49
“ virtue and the progress of mankind are rendered pos'“ sible—is Preventive Sexual Intercourse. By this
“ is meant sexual intercourse where precautions are used
“ to prevent impregnation. In this way love would be
obtained without entailing upon us the want of food and
“ leisure by overcrowding the population........... Women,
“ if they had not the fear of becoming pregnant before
“ their eyes, would indulge their sexual desires just as
“ men do. Hence the vehement prejudices in favour of
“ our present code of sexual morality, and of the institu“ tion of marriage, together with the determined hostility
“ to anything in the shape of unmarried intercourse—at
“ least, on the part of women—are the chief obstacles to
“the consideration of the most important of all subjects—
“ preventive sexual intercourse ” (p. 349).
“ Preventive sexual intercourse, then, is the mode, and
“ the only possible mode, of reconciling the opposing
“difficulties of the population problem, and is the only
“possible solution for the great social evils of this .and
“other old countries. I stake my life—I would stake a
“thousand lives—on the truth of this. There is no
“ subject on which I have thought so long and felt so
“ deeply as the sexual one. It has been ever present to
“ me for many years; and, long before I read the works
“of Mr. Malthus and Mr. Mill, my mind was absorbed
“ in the evils I saw and read of from sexual abstinence
“and other sexual difficulties and diseases ” (p. 352).
“ Therefore, any man or woman, it matters not what
“ be their station in life, whether their destiny be a palace
“or a hovel, who has more thari the small proportion of
“children which the circumstances of an old country
“ allow, as the fair average to each individual, is an irre“ ligious being, and disregards one of the most sacred of
“ all the moral duties, thus inevitably causing disease and
“misery to some of his fellow creatures” (p. 362).
This must end our quotations from a book which we
need not characterise; written, as the reader may be able
to judge from the examples we have given, with great
earnestness and with considerable ability. We have quoted
fairly, but could not properly go into medical and surgical
-details, and we refrain from publishing the methods suggested
�5°
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
for securing the end proposed. They are similar to thosegiven in “ The Fruits of Philosophy ” and in Mrs. Besant’s
“ Law of Population.”
Will it be pretended that these are merely the teachings
of one man, for whom the great body of Secularists are not
responsible? Mrs. Besant thinks otherwise. “What is
morality ?” she asks, in her “ Law of Population.” “ It is
the greatest good of the greatest number. It is immoral to
give life where you cannot support it. It is immoral to bring
children into the world when you cannot: clothe, feed, and
educate them.”
And she goes on to instruct women as to how they can
avoid the greatest evil of life, and justifies herself by
quotations from a long list of Secularist philosophers:
Francis Place, James Watson, Robert Dale Owen, the two
Mills, the two Holyoakes, and several others. But we have
already had abundant evidence that “ The Elements of
Social Science ” embodies the principles of Cat-and-Ladle
Secularism, and we should as soon expect to see the Koran
repudiated by Mohammedans, or the New Testament by
Christians, as “ The Elements ” by any palaeo-Secular orga
nisation.
�PAL7E0-SECULARIST SOCIETY.
51
Chapter VIII.
PAL^EO-SECULARIST SOCIETY.
It is time that we consider what is involved in these Palaeo
Secularist doctrines, and what would be the condition of
human society if they were universally adopted and carried
out in practice. Either boys and girls, as soon as they
arrived at the age of puberty, say from fifteen to seven
teen years, would marry, or would engage in sexual amours
without marriage. If the rule were marriage, it would
necessitate polygamy in old countries where there is a
surplus of women, and polyandry where there is a surplus
of men. Virginity in either sex is denounced as a state of
mortal sin, dangerous to health and life. For the married
some provision must be made for husbands during the
periods of maternal disablement, necessary absence, or the
illness of either wife or husband; and there could be per
mitted only very brief widowhood.
Palaeo-Secularists stipulate for free and easy divorce, and
that means simply a system of concubinage such as now
exists to some extent, and is not considered of sufficient
importance for legal registration. If the physiological
doctrines of “ The Elements ” are true, special arrange
ments should be made for the army, navy, and all sea-going
vessels. Women should be enlisted in all the services as
well as men. Prostitution, as we have seen, though de
grading, is honourable; but, if all women would adopt
these principles, there would be no need of a particular
class, because all women would be virtually prostitutes, and
The now necessary and useful profession would be abolished.
Seduction would be neither actionable nor immoral—in
fact, as soon as all women are converted to palaeo-Secularism
it would cease to exist. As common hospitality and common
humanity would forbid men and women to deny to others
any necessary of life, there could no longer be any jealousy,
�52
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
or miserably selfish suits in the Divorce Court about
adultery. With free divorce the court could be abolished,
and marriage itself, in its legal form, must quickly disappear.
All poems, novels, tragedies, and comedies, based upon past
or present ideas of virtue, chastity, fidelity, and what have
been considered manly and womanly virtues, would be obso
lete, and read only as antique curiosities. We should have
a practical palaeo-Secular world, satisfying its animal propen
sities and using artificial means to prevent having too many
children.
Men and women of England, this is the picture of the
society of the future set before you by the palaeo-Secularist
leaders and the author of “ The Elements of Social
Science.” These are the lessons taught to the young men
and young women in the halls of science, advocated in news
papers and pamphlets, and studied in Secular reading-rooms^
Look at these doctrines :—
Chastity is a crime.
Unbridled sensuality is virtue.
The Law of Nature commands the constant exercise of
the pro-creative function.
The Law of Population forbids that this act should be
allowed to produce its natural result in the production of
offspring.
There have been Atheists who worship Nature; but the
Secular Malthusians hold her in small reverence. They
mend her blunders with their superior wisdom. Nature
has united pleasure with the function which continues the
life of the race. They seek to enjoy the pleasure and
prevent the object for which the function was made. This
is the outcome of development by natural selection. There
must be, however, some old-fashioned people in the world
to whom these results of “science, falsely so-called,” are
what the Bible has characterised them, in three words:—
“ Earthly, Sensual, Devilish.”
�ADDENDUM.
55
ADDENDUM.
We have heard a good deal about the heroism involved
in the publishing of such works as “ The Elements ” and
the Knowlton pamphlet. There is no heroism in the thing
at all; but there is a good deal of cowardice, not without a.
dash of greed and avarice. A section of the public is
prurient, and the publication of “ nasty ” books like “ The
Elements’’and “The Fruits of Philosophy” is profitable.
It is a trait of a coward to insult when he deems he can do
so with impunity. The publishers and abettors of these
feculent works have insulted society, but they dare not
defy it. If a certain lady and gentleman be earnest and
consistent teachers, they surely ought to practise what
they preach re promiscuous coition and artifices to escape
*
maternity.
Dare they state in the press that they do so ?
Dare they mount the platform and illustrate before the audi
ence animal as they might do vegetable physiology, as re
gards fructification and reproduction ? They dare not do
this because of the police. They have the avarice and
truculence to insult society; but they have not the earnest
ness and heroism to defy it. They can put their names to
obscene works ouf of which they can make notoriety and
money, but beyond this they dare not go: decency they
have already set aside, but they are deterred by fear.
* It must be strictly understood that I deal with the two persons,
referred to as public teachers, and as public teachers only. As indi
viduals I have nothing whatever to do with them.
�54
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
While we execrate their indecency, let us be thankful for
their fear. Let us congratulate ourselves that, although by
their pruriency Freethought has been insulted, we owe it to
their cowardice that Freethought has not been outraged.
Talk of the Pagan Saturnalia and Eleusinian Mysteries ; talk
of the early Christian Agapse : what were these to the Brad
laugh and Besant theory carried out to public demonstra
tion “in the interests of the poor”? Split in the party!
Better a thousand splits than a moment’s acquiescence in
such inexpressible subter-beastliness ! Attacking fellowFreethinkers ! Fate forfend that I should acknowledge them
as fellow Freethinkers of mine. The cross is the symbol
of Christianity; and, if the syringe is to be the emblem of
Freethought, I must mourn without ceasing that, in virtue of
my mental and moral organisation, it is impossible for me to
'be a Christian and accept the creed whose symbol is the
•cross and not the syringe.
Do I state a far-fetched and false corollary when I allege
that the propagandists of Knowltonism should resort to
practical demonstration if they were consistent and had the
■courage of their convictions ? I submit that the corollary
is a pertinent, inexpugnable one. Knowltonism involves
practical physiology, practical chemistry, and practical
mechanics, and I contend that those branches of science
cannot be taught effectively without demonstration and ex
periment. In a little theoretical treatise at sixpence I
deny that they can be taught effectively “ in the interests of
the poor.” Why, in the name of courage and consistency,
is the demonstration lacking ?
Do I write on an indelicate subject ? The fault is not
mine. I am a Freethinker, and those describing themselves
by the same specific term have committed themselves to
abominations against which I, in the name of Freethought,
must protest. I must protest, too, that the only organised
•Society of “ Freethinkers ” in England perpetually elects as
President one who has done worse than blasphemed fifty
�ADDENDUM.
55
gods, has outraged the highest and purest instincts of human
nature. Do I write harshly ? It is because the language
of mortals lacks in bitterness that I do not write more
harshly still. The gentleman who could sit down with
another gentleman’s wife to edit in conjunction with her a
work on sexual commerce should be painted in pigments the
due manipulation of which is beyond my skill as a limner.
Is it well to place in the front of English Freethought
a gentleman who, in conjunction with another gentleman’s
wife, edited a work which dealt with making sexual inter
course abortive, and which work a jury of his countrymen
pronounced obscene ? I say it is not well. And, since on
the subject every other voice in the Freethought ranks is
dumb, I lift my voice in the name of the mothers and
daughters of England who, in renouncing Christ, did not
also renounce chastity; who, in disbelieving that their
bodies were temples of the Holy Ghost, did not necessarily
believe that they were mere organisms for the gratification
of carnal desire. In the name of the English wife and
mother I plead and I appeal. Against obscenity in office
and filth in high places in bur party I, a man in the ranks,
lift up my testimony, execrating all that would sully the
purity of woman and the sanctity of home.
I am willing to admit that our existing social arrangements
are not all that can be desired; that the social machine
works with considerable friction. This may be a reason
why the machine should be lubricated; but it is no reason
why it should be broken to pieces. That wives are not
always happy is no reason why all women should be un
married harlots. The besetting sin of mob-Freethought of
the Richard Carlile school is the prejudiced assumption
that everything that is is wrong, simply because it is.
“Down with all that’s up!” is practically the motto and
watchword of the unthinking outcasts and rebels who, for
the last seventy years, have made Freethought stink in the
nostrils of everybody whose adhesion would be valuable.
�56
SEXUAL ECONOMY.
Prima facie, because a thing is up it should be up, and
because a thing is down it should be down. The world was
not “created” yesterday; and, by the doctrine of Evolu
tion, about which mob leaders prate so loudly, and which
they understand so imperfectly, it has had considerable time
and opportunity to arrange itself according to evolutionary
law. Evolution must be permitted to work till we rise to
higher and purer social levels. In the home and the family
centre the most dearly-cherished love and the holiest
sentiment of the English race. This cannot and must
not be overthrown by cataclysm. We cannot and must
not substitute for the family only isolated children, whom
sulphate of zinc have spared, and who may know their
mother, but who cannot possibly know their father; while
•their mother’s ignorance on the subject would necessarily be
nearly as profound as their own. The bare idea is a crime,
because it is revolting to the holiest instincts of our nature.
Would man gain as much by the free exercise of sensuality
as he would lose by having no home—for a wife a supply of
harlots, and for sons and daughters promiscuously-begotten
and promiscuously-supported children, the results of sen
suality having failed in its devilish artifices ?
The Freethinkers, so-called, persistently place at their head
a man who, as I have said elsewhere, the gentlemen of the
British House of Commons will not permit to sit on the
same benches with them, even though, by keeping him out,
they break the law and outrage the Constitution. On
technical pretexts he is prevented from taking his seat; but
the true reason for the aversion to him is not heresy and
Radicalism—there are plenty of heretics and Radicals in
the House already—but men turn away, as from a toad or
a serpent, from a person who teaches that marriage is an
•evil and chastity a crime, that promiscuous coition is most
desirable, and that seduction is a virtue. Liberal and Con
servative alike bolt the door in the face of this Caliban who
■would, by his teachings, make every woman a prostitute, every
�ADDENDUM.
57
home a maison-de-joie, and licentiousness and the manufac
ture of syringes the staple industries of England. And this
person, not permitted to sit with the most abandoned rake
and reprobate the House can produce, the English “ Free
thinkers ” elect as their President, and then they wonder that
they do not succeed, that they have to meet in tenth-rate pub
lic-houses, and clank their applause with pewter-pots ; while
not even a solitary thinker of distinction has ever joined
them—not one scientist of reputation, not one poet or man of
letters, not one individual of the slightest social weight. The
Freethinkers proper—the Herbert Spencers, the Huxleys,
the Tyndalls, the Frederic Harrisons, the Matthew Arnolds,
and the Algernon Swinburnes—would never dream of
touching the mess of Secularistic pottage into which the
“ fighting President ” has dropped his syringe, in order that
no respectable person may put a spoon in it. Popular Freethought can never reach the Ai of success while Achan,
the son of Carmi, is in its ranks, treasuring “ the accursed
thing”—the shekels of silver and the goodly Babylonish
*
garment —in the shape of profits from the sales of works
that contend that man should be a sensualist and the world
a numero.
We have, more than once, been assured that “The
Elements ” and kindred works are issued with the best
intentions. Even if we take this apologetic allegation as
genuine, we cannot forget that a certain mythical locality is
paved with good intentions ; and surely this advocacy of
unbridled lust is the largest and most prominent paving
stone in all hell. I am free to admit that the author of
the book is evidently a man with more than average ability,
and there is a certain Machiavelian insidiousness in his
pages which greatly enhances their danger to the morals of
the young and inexperienced, and they make up a very large
component part of the public.
* See Joshua vii., passim.
�SEXUAL ECONOMY.
True, the Divorce Court and the existence of such social
hideousness as was only too distinctly indicated by the
Mary Jeffries exposure may afford a pretext for a desperate
*
measure to counteract a desperate malady; but surely, in
the name of common sanity, to abolish the Divorce Court
by abolishing marriage, and to suppress houses of evil fame
by making all women courtesans, is a measure drastic even
to madness. Monogamic marriage may set up a standard
which is too high to be generally attainable; but all social
standards should be high, and public teachers should ever
be urging on the public conscience to an attempt to reach
the highest moral level. This, with its thousand faults,
Christianity, through its ministers, has not failed to do; and
we must not censure it too harshly because it has not
always succeeded. As long as Christianity insists on sexual
purity and restraint, and debars the transgressor from her
sacraments, she does the world a service which goes some
way to compensate for many crimes and errors of which
she has been guilty. As long as Freethought gives counte
nance and encouragement to sensuality, she perpetrates
against society an error and a crime for which all the good
she has done the world can hardly compensate. As long as
the Christian teaching as to sexual morals obtains and has
Society’s endorsement, the most pronounced evil-liver is
constrained to be remorseful that he has fallen short of the
standard; and that very feeling of remorse acts as a restraint
to still further excesses. But he who adopts the teachings
of “ The Elements ” has no high ideal up to which he
tries to bring the measure of his conduct; with him
there need be no remorse and no regrets; there is no
standard of purity after which to struggle and to strive;
there is only the inexpressible Malebolg£ of unbounded
sensuality and shameless lust: no woman you love that it is
not proper for another to love to-morrow; no maid such as
See the Sentinel for June, 1885.
�ADDENDUM.
59
has heretofore blessed the bridegroom’s arms, but only a
shameless and deflowered harlot who has responded to the
desires of others as she responds to yours; a social con
venience, like a drinking fountain or a chalet; a creature
liable to be called into use anywhere, at any time, and by
anybody, and who constantly carries a syringe in her muff,
in the name of Bradlaugh and “Freethought!”
Saladin.
��
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Sexual economy, as taught by Charles Bradlaugh, M.P. : with addendum by Saladin
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Agate, Peter
Ross, William Stewart
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 59 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Appears to have taken from a bound volume. Top edge gilded. Date of publication from KVK. Stamp on verso of t.p.: Bishopsgate Institute Reference Library. Part of another Bishopsgate stamp on p. 59. From the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
W. Stewart & Co.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1885?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N041
Subject
The topic of the resource
Sexuality
Birth control
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /><br /><span>This work (Sexual economy, as taught by Charles Bradlaugh, M.P. : with addendum by Saladin), identified by </span><span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk">Humanist Library and Archives</a></span><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
Charles Bradlaugh
Contraception
Joseph Barker
NSS
Sexual Behaviour
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/9ca37caaf7ed628007f9c582ddf84b0a.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=XxvZkv3UzxmzBiOJRY7N9jH5N2fa54KOFGZRjB8WEL5kNCgkOWT0jgw3cK%7E%7E3YWpEF0nBU2B5aEsKQtvoG0bJTsTtv7CMKgxPmfdTtLg1Y%7EOObJRojQU7XWWdSPjXiqakk3Ly9CapwJ0-zU70Hn4UVX6CawOnd-uqfoL%7E4d9WvxBAGVjnWJHR7DS50dEloFi97vwRvNhgi2cMVfIhAGiHjcnOStEwFqGLguwvJ2xnNZv-LOrchITcoMVZbC2zW1UoG4VlB3zbYkpQwDhZS3wHhOKLqT-4LH0jfOvuVuuwoSk1YWn2-meqD7rmpst8aMsFU2ozCFis2ayreoUxAO6Jw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
8ea93bd60cd6c5b679b19d59f0d1b1c9
PDF Text
Text
NS2^>
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
INDIVIDUAL, FAMILY
AND
NATIONAL POVERTY.
REASONS WHY IN EVERY FAMILY THE NUMBER SHOULD
BE REGULATED; THE METHODS THAT HAVE BEEN
PROPOSED, EXTENSIVELY ADOPTED, AND FOUND
TO ANSWER FOR DOING IT; TOGETHER
WITH A FEW VALUABLE HINTS
FOR THE YOUNG.
BY
JNO.
HY.
PALMER.
“ One would imagine that children were rained down upon married people, direct
from heaven, without their being art or part in the matter; that it was really, as the
common phrases have it, God's will, and not their own, which decided the numbers
of their offspring." “ No one would guess from the language of either (rich or poor)
that man had any voice or choice in the matter. So complete is the confusion of
ideas on the whole subject, owing in a great degree to the mystery in which it is
shrouded by a spurious delicacy, which prefers that right and wrong should be
mismeasured and confounded on one of tlie subjects most momentous to human
welfare, rather than that the subjects should be freely spoken of and discussed.
People are little aware of the cost to mankind of this scrupulosity of speech."
John Stuart Mill.
LONDON:
E. TRUELOVE, PUBLISHER, 256, HIGH HOLBORN.
1875.
PRICE TWOPENCE.
�After penning the following pamphlet it seemed to the writer, that
to ensure the complete success of his effort, some little preface wa3
needed to be addressed to those who from various circumstances
are unable to regulate families of their own. Although the subject
applies definitely to persons in the reproductive age of life, yet it
must not therefore be supposed that none others are interested in it.
By a careful consideration of the law and its precept endeavoured to
be set forth on pages 8 to 13, I think it will appear that the matter
is of immense importance to everyone. Many are of opinion that
apart from the practice here recommenced there is no effective
remedy for the wide spread poverty, and with it the vice, crime,
and misery that prevail. For strong language in support of this
I would refer the reader to Book II, chapter 13, of John Stuart Mill s
“Principles of Political Economy,’’..(People’s Edition) in which he
treats on the Remedies for Low Wages; also to “ Poverty, its only
Cause and only Cure,” in “Elements of Social Science.” These
authors especially desire the formation of a sound, healthy public
opinion in favour of small families. To assist the growth of that
opinion by stating some important reasons why it should everywhere
obtain, and how it may be complied with, has been the object of
the present writer.
On pages 14 to 17 will be found a little advice, which, had it been
known, and perseveringly followed by many persons when young,
would have saved them from a deal of expense, shame, and misery.
�REASONS WHY IN EVERY FAMILY THE
NUMBER SHOULD BE REGULATED.
As its title indicates, the object of this little pamphlet is to state as
briefly as possible some important reasons why the number in every
family should be regulated, to point out the various methods that
have been proposed, extensively adopted, and found to answer for
doing it. The ideas here put forth are not new, they are most of
them to be found fully developed and demonstrated in the books
mentioned in the preface, and from which they have been taken.
The present writer desires only to give such a condensation as he
thinks will be useful for general distribution by all, even the poorest
who should feel an interest in the subject. I say by the poorest, for
although the reasons apply with great force to all, yet they refer
especially to, and their importance will be seen the clearest by working
men, the toilers and the bread-winners, who with their wives and
children make up the vast majority of the nation.
By regulating the number in a family I mean that the parents,
having brought forih as many children as circumstances warrant
them in having, they shall thereupon cease to beget any more. If
people have this power, and I shall presently show that they have,
then it follows, that they also possess some control over the times
when such increase shall take place. The author of the “ Elements
of Social Science,” and Mr. R. D. Owen, in his “ Moral Physiology,”
deal only with the subject of controlling the number of children to be
born; Mr. Combe, in his book on the “ Constitution of Man,” treats
of the kind of children they will be I wish to urge that parents
should regulate with reference both to the number and the kind of
child)en they desire.
The first part of my task will be to demonstrate the existence and
illustrate the working of a great law in nature, a knowledge of which
is of the utmost importance; for unless it be understood there can be
no regulation in aiiy proper sense of the term. And the law is that
children’s characters are entirely the result of circumstances, which
circumstances are to be considered as to whether they were previous
to or after birth. Circumstances previous to birth may be called
constitutional; those after birth educational.
Taking first the constitutional circumstances, I need only direct
attention to the unvarying continuance of national peculiarities as a
sufficient proof that the qualities of children are determined first of
all by the stock from which they are born. Thus from white races
will be born white children, from black races black children, from
tall races tall children, from short races short children. Similarly
from brave races come brave children, from intelligent races come
�4
intelligent children, and vice versa. And as races are made up of
individuals it is further seen that children are as their parents
are, whether white or black, tall or short, strong or weak, healthy
or sickly, intelligent or otherwise. Mr. Geo. Combe states that
“Physiologists, in general, are agreed, that a vigorous and healthy
constitution of body in the parents, communicates existence in
the most perfect state to the offspring, and vice versa. The
transmission of various diseases from parent to children is a
matter of universal notoriety: thus consumption, gout, scrofula,
hydrocephalus, rheumatism, and insanity, are well known as maladies
which descend from generation to generation. “ Strictly speaking,
it is not disease which is transmitted, but organs of such imperfect
structure that they are unable to perform their functions properly,
and so weak as to be easily put into a morbid condition by causes
which sound organs are able to resist.” Not that this transmission
compels the offspring of consumptive parents to be consumptive too.
but it “renders them so weak as to be easily put into a morbid
condition.” If the rules of health are thoroughly known and rigidly
practised, the tendency may be diminished, or even effectually
warded off. Therefore I would solemnly warn all who are afflicted
with any hereditary disease, never, on any account to beget children
until they have thoroughly investigated the laws of health, and
determined to enforce them on themselves and their children. *
A clear and uudeniable proof of the transmission of qualities, and
also that the characters are derived from both parents, is to be
found in the progeny of marriages between moral and intelligent
Europeans and native Americans who are inferior. “All authors
agree,” says Mr. Combe, “ and report the circumstance as singularly
striking, that the children of such unions are decidedly superior iu
mental and moral qualities to the native, while they are still inferior
to the European parent.”
But there is a most important modification of the law, namely that
the qualities of a child are determined not only by the constitution of the
stock from which it is derived, but also by the faculties which are strongest
in power and activity in the parents at the particular time when the
organic existence of that child commences. In proof of this Mr. Combe
relates a case in which at the time of impregnation both parents were
utterly insensible through drinking, the result being the birth of an
idiot. Another case of a parent addicted to drinking who transmitted
the same tendency to several of his children, but children born to him
after he had formed more correct habits were not so inclined. When
two parties marry very young the eldest of their children is generally
less intelligent than those born to them in more mature age. So too
“ It is rare for the descendants of men far advanced in years to be
distinguished for high qualities of either body or mind.” Anything
* Hereditary Descent, it* Laws and Facts applied to Human Improvement, by
0. S. Fowler.
�which causes the mother to be frightened, excited, irritated, over
anxious, or depressed in spirits, has an injurious effect on the future
being, and should therefore be avoided. Persons desirous of becoming
parents ought well to consider these things ; if they can they should
obtain the books in which they are fully and distinctly expounded,
live up to the characters they would desire their children to possess,
and then select that period in their lives most favourable to the
production of strong, healthy, good-natured and intelligent children.
Having thus dealt with the constitutional circumstances, my next
duty is to point out that whatever may be the inborn qualities of a
child, yet as an adult its character will be very greatly influenced by
the circumstances atttending its early life. Its physical health will
depend upon its supply of food, clothing, lodging, personal cleanliness,
and exercise. A child with insufficient food or clothing cannot grow
up strong. Large and well ventilated bedrooms are as necessary to
health as plenty of food. Wide airy streets are better for health
than narrow close courts and lanes. Daily washing of the body, and a
frequent change of underclothing are also indispensable. And exercise
should not be such as to overtax the worker. For children to ripen
into strong and healthy men and women all these matters require
careful and constant attention. The Government inspection of food
in the market, “ Local Boards of Health,” “ Half Time Acts ” to prevent
children from being gradually killed by exhaustive labour, show to
what extent these principles are already recognized by the State.
So too the intellectual and moral welfare of children has been partly
taken in hand by the Government, compulsory attendance at school
for a number of years being already adopted by many of the School
Boards. But the parent who desires the wellbeing of his children
will not be content with the education enforced by the State, he will
endeavour to supply them with good books, and during their youth pay
for their admission to evening classes and lectures, or in other ways
provide them with instructors, and thus train out their intellectual
powers to the fullest extent. And children cannot be thus employed
in useful studies without being morally the better for it. Only
develop in them a taste for good and useful pursuits, and they will
of themselves avoid what is degrading. Then too with regard to a
start in life, it is not right that a parent should turn his boy or
girl out into the first place that offers the means of gaining a sixpence.
A good start in life is half the battle, and parents should endeavour
to give sut> to their children. This brings me direct to the point
of numbers, tor a man who has a family of six or eight children and
only a moderate income cannot help himself. The constant cry of
parents is that they do not know what to do with their children.
They cannot afford to keep them in idleness waiting for something
better to turn up. Nor have they the cash to apprentice them to
a trade, or to put them in the way of getting a little business of
their own. The children must therefore take the first chance of
employment th^t comes in their way, even though it give little or
�6
no prospect of rising to a higher position. Now suppose a man
has had two children born to him, and he and his wife are in good
health, such as would ensure che production of a strong and healthy
child, I urge that if he happen to desire another, he ought first to
consider seriously whether he is able to do for it all that its wellbeing
requires, and that too without injustice to the children already born,
without injustice to his wife, and without injury to himself. If he
cannot do this, then I say he should refrain himself. In other words
a man should beget no more children than he and his wife can bring
into the world strong and healthy; no more than they can perfectly
nourish with wholesome food, comfortably clothe, and healthily and
decently lodge in their homes; no more than the wife can properly
attend to without becoming a drudge, no more tlian the husband can
have well educated, well supplied with good books, and fairly started
in life; in short no more than he can do whole justice with. If a
man be in a high position, receiving a good income, and can comply
with these conditions, there is still one more,—while bringing up to
maturity and sending into the world a large family, can he at the
same time be doing justice to the children of his neighbour? This
last consideration is a national one, which is gradually receiving the
attention it deserves. I am myself of opinion that in the present
state of England no man should beget more than three children,
while the circumstances of many warrant them in having but one
or two. And the reasons for this I will endeavour to make plain by
showing how the four parties affected are severally interested in the
regulation of numbers, namely the children, the mother, the father,
and the nation
In reference to the children let me remind my reader that I urge for
regulation first as to the kind of children, that they may be strong,
healthy, good-natured, and intelligent, four qualifications of inestimable
value to their possessors ; and next that the parents should beget no
more children than they can bring up strong, healthy, good-natured,
and intelligent. If a man only possess these qualities we need have
little fear of his doing well. By enjoying a healthy constitution he is
free from bodily suffering, having strength he is able to perform with
comfort to himself the labour of life. A man of good nature may have
a few enemies, but will certainly get more friends; and if in addition to
this he possess a strong and active intelligence to guide him through
life happy is he. The same holds good in their early years; for
whether they be born of high family or low, of a prince or a peasant,
who so happy as strong, healthy, good-natured, intelligent children!
Contrast with such the puny, the delicate, and the dull children
often met with. One is weak in the lower limbs and cannot run,
another from consumptive parents is soon put out of breath when
playing, a third is sickly and bilious and often ill, a fourth has a
watery brain, a fifth, a cross irritable spiteful disposition, a sixth
being unintelligent is dull and lazy with his lessons, and stupid at
anything given him to do. When these maladies and a multitude
�of others are considered, and it is laoicn that fur the most part they
might have been avoided, I think it will be at once admitted that it
would be beneficial for the parents to regulate towards the health,
strength, good nature, and intelligence of their children. As to
numbers, need 1 say that children in small families can have more
comforts than those in large ones? A man with only two children
can do better for them than if he had with the same money to provide
for six others besides. He can give them better food, and in a possible
sickness a few dainties if needed, stronger and better clothes, including
plenty of underlinen, better ventilated and more comfortable bedrooms,
{deasanter living rooms, can lodge them in nicer streets, keep them
onger at school, buy a few books for them, and take more care of their
starting in life. Is it desirable that he should be able to do this?
Would it have the effect of sending into the world stronger, healthier,
wiser, and better men ? If sc then 1 hold that in the interest of his
children a man should regulate their number.
Next the mother’s reasons:—The late John Stuart Mill in his
“Principles of Political Economy” says, “It is seldom by the choice
of the wife that families are so numerous; on her devolves (along with
all the physical suffering, and at least a full share of the privations) the
whole of the intolerable drudgery resulting from excess. To be relieved,
of it w’ould be held as a blessing by multitudes of women who now never
venture to urge such a claim, but who would urge it if supported by
the moral feelings of the community.” I, as one of the community am
endeavouring to support the above remarks, and to urge her claim on
man’s consideration. First, think of the “physical suffering” a woman
has to undergo when bringing forth a child, even if she be herself strong
and healthy. When she is not strong the suffering is intensified, even
to the risk of her life. Many a mother is ruined in health and strength,
many more are lulled outright, by bearing children so quickly one after
another. Would she not be happier bv avoiding this suffering and risk
of life? If so then regulate the time of her childbearing. The mother
too has to endure her full share of the poverty resulting from a large
family, and the whole of the intolerable drudgery. She must have poor
clothes that the children may be supplied, and poor fare that they may
be fed, and that too sometimes when having two lives to sustain she
needs the most nourishment of all. As to her work it is never done ;
what with meals getting, house cleaning, washing, clothes making and
mending, a baby to tend, and it sometimes a poorly one, where is
her rest or peace of mind? Among the poorest her home too is so
■hoerless that her husband often will not stay7 in it, but goes away to
the publichouse, where, in the company of his mates, and with the
aid of drink, he strives to forget his poverty.
Oftentimes the husband dies w’hile the family is still very young,
and leaves nothing for the poor mother but increased slavery and the
permitted beggary of asking for parish relief. Think of the difference
if the wife had only one or two children, strong, healthy, good-natured,
and intelligent, and with them the assurance from her husband that
�8
she is to bear no more. How her toil is saved ! With what care sne
can nourish her children 1 How daintily tend the home ! How well
preserve her own health and beauty !
And think too _ how much better for the husband ! For in social
affairs whoever gives real happiness to another increases thereby his
own. Is it not bettei for the man to have two children well nourished
well dressed, well lodged, well educated, and well started in life, than
to have six or eight children so badly provided for that he is almost
ashamed to own them ? And what husband does not feel pleased when
his wife looks fresh and happy ? Who can take a pleasure in seeing the
lines of care come early on her face ? I say then that a man for his
own sake should regulate the number of his children. For, by taking
care of his wife, that she does not conceive while in delicate health,
that she be spared the pains of bearing a large family, and the slavery
of tending it afterwards, he will draw towards himself a double portion
of her love and kindly offices; when, returning from his day’s toil, a
welcome smile is ready for him, along with his well kept and comfortable
home. With a large family a father is never free from the harassing
care of providing the means of living, but with a small one he is relieved
of such trouble, and in its stead may lay by a little store for his
own and his wife’s old age. It is surely pleasant to feel that you have
something in the bank ready for a “rainy day,” that you will not
become a burden to your children. Let me, therefore, urge on my
readers the desirability of regulating in favour of strong, healthy,
good-natured, intelligent children, and for such a number as the parents
can do whole justice with, both to the children and to themselves.
And also such a number as by having them the parents do no
injustice to their neighbours. This may seem a new doctrine to my
readers, but it is by no means new to the thoughtful men of the a»e.
A doctrine that has been before the world for seventy-five years, and
accepted by the ablest of the political economists who have lived during
that time, cannot be called new. It may be unknown to the masses,
or ignored by those who should obey it, but that does not remove
the suffering caused by violating it. The precept is founded on what is
called the Law of Population, which was first discovered by the Rev.
Thomas Robert Malthus, and published by him in 1798. If the remarks
which I shall make on this subject are not convincing to my readers let
me earnestly request the perusal of the chapters on Poverty, its only
Cause and only Cure, page 331; the Law of Population, page 457 ;
the Laws of Exercise, Fecundity, and Agricultural Industry, page 485,’
and the Opinions of English and Foreign writers on the Law of
Population, in the “ Elements of Social Science.” See also a few
chapters in J. S. Mill’s “Principles of Political Economy,” namely
Bk. I, chapters 9, 12, 13 ; Bk. II, chapters 11, 12, 13 ; these and many
observations in other parts of his great work derive their force from
being based on the Law of Population.
Which law may be briefly stated thus :—1. It is not only possible
but natural for population to continue doubling itself every twenty-five
�9
years. 2. In old countries it is not possible for it in the same time,
and from the same soil, to continue doubling its supply of the necessaries
of life. 3. If therefore the births continue at such a rate as to double
the population in twenty-five years, then those that cannot maintain
themselves in their native place must either emigrate, be supplied with
food from other countries, or die a premature death from poverty.
4. If the population of any place is not doubling itself every twenty-five
years then it must be either from premature deaths, emigration, or
limitation of the number of births. 6. Wholly to avoid premature
deaths, and the necessity of emigration or importation of food, the
number of births must be limited to the number that can be nourished
in their native place. 6. Wherever poverty of resources and therefore
the necessity of emigration exists, there has been too great a number
of births. These rules apply to every village, town, county, or country
in the world.
To enforce the first statement I need only to quote from Mill’s
“Political Economy,” people’s edition, page 97, where, in treating of
man’s multiplying power he states, “ It never is exercised to the
utmost, and yet in the most favourable circumstances known to exist,
which are those of a fertile region colonized from an industrious and
civilized community, population has continued for several generations,
independently of fresh immigration, to double itself in not much more
than twenty years. That the capacity of multiplication in the human
species exceeds even this is evident if we consider how great is the
ordinary number of children to a family where the climate is good,
and early marriages usual; and how small a proportion of them die
before the age of maturity, in the present state of hygienic knowledge,
where the locality is healthy, and the family adequately provided with
the means of living.” In the “Elements of Social Science,” page 451,
quoting from M’Culloch, the eminent statistical authority, we find’
“It has been established beyond all question that the population of
some of the States of North America, after making d re allowance for
immigration has continued to double for a century past in so short
a period as twenty, or at most twenty-five years.” For the figures
and calculations see “Elements of Social Science,” page 277. If the
population of the British Isles could increase at the same rate, it
would in seventy-five years amount to no less than 240,000,000, or
nearly as many as the present population of all Europe. And by
continuing the process another fifty years the number of 960,000,000
would be reached, a number nearly equal to the estimated present
population of the whole world. On the second head Mr. Mill says,
“After a certain and not very advanced stage in the progress of
agriculture it is a law of production from land that in any given state
of agricultural skill and knowledge, by increasing the labour, the
produce is not increased in an equal degree ; doubling the labour’ does
not double the produce.” This law of agricultural industry is the
most important proposition in political economy. The produce may
be increased by whatever adds to the skill of the labour applied;
*
�12
e-
position in which people live the better are 11 icy able to secure
good positions for their children in their native country. And they
generally do it, leaving those of the poorer classes to shift for
themselves as best they may, either by emigration, the workhouse,
or semi-starvation, and death by the first severe illness that comes
upon them. We may see this illustrated every day in the middle
ranks. A head clerk in a firm or the foreman in a factory has the
first chance of places for his family of boys; the mechanics come
next in the order of their qualities, and so on to the lowest. Not
that the particular ones chosen will do more to increase the prosperity
of the business, but their fathers being in good positions are able
to provide for their sons in their native district. The same takes
place with business men in towns and villages; the best off are able
to secure occupations for their children, and leave to others to go
elsewhere. But with a family of two children a man thrusts no one
out. He merely brings into existence two beings to take the place of
himself and his wife when departed. To bring into existence and
keep in their native place such a number of beings as causes others to
be compelled to remain unmarried, to be half starved, or thrust out,
is an injustice. Let me, therefore, repeat and urge on my readers the
desirability of every couple regulating in favour of strong, healthy,
good-natured, and intelligent children, and for such a number as full
justice can be done with, justice to the children themselves, to their
mother, the father, and to their neighbours.
A thorough knowledge of this Law of Population is of immense
importance to every class in the country, except the highest. For
though there are possibilities in trade, yet every one is liable to be
pressed down by someone else above him who may be endeavouring to
provide for a larger number of children than is his due. So that a man
who has only a small family is better off than with a large one; but
if small families were the rule, his position would be improved still
more. With an industrious people, following to the full the course
here recommended, the workhouses will in time be closed for want
of paupers, the hospitals almost empty for want of patients, gaols
almost, if not quite, unused for want of criminals. Ignorance with
poverty are the most fruitful sources of crime. Remove then the
ignorance and the poverty. Moderate competition in trade is good
for all parties, but a grinding, harassing competition, a struggle to keep
head above water invariably brings a crop of frauds of all kinds. People
must live, and, whether by fair means or foul, the strongest in mind
and body maintain life the longest. For myself I like the old maxim,
“Prevention is better than cure.” Don’t have weak, unhealthy,
cross-natured, stupid children, don’t have more than can be well and
honestly nourished. Without this prevention, all schemes for social
improvement are valueless. Let the reader think of them, one and
all, and he will find none that can exist along with the crushing
influence of over-population, not one that, apart from limiting the
number of births, has had any permanent influence in increasing the
�13
happiness of mankind. Without this they can do no more than
change the misery from one form to another. See to it then, make
yourself thoroughly acquainted with the laws by which qualities are
transmitted from parent to children, the laws for rearing those children
into strong, healthy, honest, and intelligent men and women; and lastly
the great Law of Population as it is at present operating in your own
country. And having yourself gained the knowledge of these things,
you will further see that for your own individual good you ought to
do all in your power to make every one else to understand and obey
the precepts founded on them. One means of doing so would be by
distributing copies of this pamphlet. I can ask you to do this, as
I am interested in its getting well abroad just as much as you are,
and not more.
——♦——
THE METHODS THAT HAVE BEEN PROPOSED,
EXTENSIVELY ADOPTED, AND FOUND SUCCESS
FUL IN REGULATING
THE
NUMBER
IN A
FAMILY, TOGETHER WITH HINTS FOR THE
YOUNG.
Having thus dealt with the principal reasons why in every family the
number should be regulated, my remaining task is to state the methods
that have been proposed, extensively adopted, and always found success
ful in doing it, leaving my readers to choose which they please, or to
select any other that happens to come to their knowledge. And in their
selection they will be guided by the answers they give to the following
questions: Is the moderate exercise of the generative organs conducive
to health or to bodily and mental weakness ? If their moderate
exercise does not cause weakness, then the pleasure derived from their
instinctive use, independent of, and totally distinct from, its ultimate
object, the reproduction of our race, is it good, proper, worth securing
and enjoying ? Or in other words, is it desirable that the instinct
should never be gratified without an increase of population ? The
author of “ Elements of Social Science,” on pages 492 to 505 of his
important work, deals with the Law of Exercise, and endeavours to
show that a moderate indulgence of the sexual instinct is absolutely
necessary to long continued health. Two extracts will indicate the
position he takes : “ The Law of Exercise is that the health of the
reproductive organs and emotions depend on their having a sufficient
amount of normal exercise ; and that a want of this tends powerfully
to produce misery and disease in both man and woman.” “ It is stated
aB a law by Mr. Paget, Dr. Carpenter, and other eminent authorities,
that ‘each organ, by the very fact of nourishing itself acts as an
excretory organ to the rest of the body.’ That is, every organ selects
from the blood the proper materials for its own nutrition, and in so
�doing it renders the blood more fit to nourish the others. This ia
especially true of secreting organs, such as the ovaries and testicles,
which produce fluids that are intended to be cast out of the body, and
are more or less noxious if retained. Hence whenever any important
organs are not duly engaged in their own special function not only is
their own vigour impaired, but that of the others also. The ideal of
health indeed cannot be Btated otherwise than as consisting in the due
performance of all the bodily functions.” The author quotes from
numerous medical writers supporting this view, and describes the
various diseases which they say arise from repressing the sexual desire.
In the same chapter are also given the arguments on the opposite view,
that the. Law of Exercise, while applying to other organs, has nothing
to do with the organs of generation. I will just caution the reader
that the matter should be decided by facts alone. For an examination
of the second question, and an emphatic answer in the affirmative I
refer the reader to the little book entitled “ Moral Physiology,” by
Robert Dale Owen. * As a matter of fact all who while not desiring
an addition to their families yet continue to indulge in sexual embraces
show by their actions that they either think it necessary for health,
the pleasure good, proper, worth securing and enjoying, or that their
instinct gets the better of theii judgment. The same is the condition
with those who will not marry, 'yet risk the awful danger, and accept
the moral degradation, of a prostitute’s embraces. (On these last points
see “Elements of Social Science,” pages 112 to 156.) If after testing
these principles the reader is of opinion that the arguments for what
is called the Law of Exercise, are so much bosh, and that the pleasure
of the act is not good, not desirable, not worth having, then all he has
to do is to select the most favourable periods for conception to take
place, and perform the sexual functions so many times according to the
number of children circumstances warrant him in having. And if at
any other time he happens to feel a desire for sexual embraces he must
treat it as a disease in his system, and doctor himself accordingly.
For if he allows this or any other passion to get the better of°his
judgment, either he, his wife, his children, or his neighbour, and
perhaps all parties will assuredly suffer in consequence.
For myself I frankly confess that I believe in the Law of Exercise,
but do not think it desirable that a child should be the result of every
sexual embrace. I am of opinion that voluptuous, or as they are
sometimes termed, wet dreams are nature’s temporary substitute for
the sexual act, and, like it, when only seldom, say once or twice a
month, are not a source of mischief. But should they become frequent,
as they tend to do, the persons are made weak, and, if ignorant of their
cause, are generally in good condition to be fooled by the first crafty
doctor that finds them. To prevent their injurious effects let those
who have them be sparing in their diet, take no stimulants, never use
tobacco, sleep cool, rise early, bathe or wash the whole body daily,
Published by E. Truelove, 256. High Holborn, London.
�z
15
rubbing with a towel till in a glow, splash cold or almost cold water on
the parts, (ladies to use the vagina syringe) take plenty of exercise in
the open air, and avoid exciting the organs by rubbing. Whoever has
been guilty of this latter practice, and injured their health, let them
immediately stop it, follow the course here marked out, and keep
clear of advertising quack doctors.
To prevent conception let the husband so steadily manage the
sexual act as to give full enjoyment to his wife, and then immediately
before the emission of the semen, withdraw the penis completely.
For an account of the extensive use to which this plan has been
put in France, Germany, Italy, and Spain, I refer the reader to
R. D. Owen’s “ Moral Physiology,” two quotations from which I will
make. “It may be objected that the practice requires a mental effort,
and a partial sacrifice. But I reply that in France, where men consider
this (as it ought ever to be considered, when the interests of the
other sex requires it) a paint of honour, all young men learn to make
the necessary effort, and custom renders it easy and a matter of course.”
“A Frenchman belonging to the cultivated classes would as soon bear
to be called a coward as to be accused of causing the pregnancy of a
woman who did not desire it. Such an imputation, if substantiated,
would shut him out from all decent society ; and most properly
so. It is a perfect barbarity, and ought to be treated as such.”
Some will say that the practice is injurious, but the most extensive
experience proves to the contrary. It is simple, satisfying to the
passion, and perfectly harmless. The evil of sexual excess, or over
indulgence is another matter. For a clear statement of what in various
constitutions would be excess, see “ Elements of Social Science,” p. 84.
The second method is for the man during the embrace to wear over
the penis a baudruche, or French letter as it is sometimes termed.
Accidents in its use cause it to be somewhat unsafe, and it is in every
way inconvenient.
A third method has been thus described: “ If before sexual intercourse
the female introduces into her vagina a piece of fine sponge as large as
can be pleasantly introduced (perhaps from the size of a walnut to that
of an egg) having previously attached a bobbin, or a piece of narrow
ribbon to withdraw it, (or, without this it may be withdrawn with the
fingers) it will be found a preventive to conception, while it neither
lessens the pleasure of the female, nor injures her health. When
convenient the sponge should be dipped in cold water, or in warm water
rather than none. The practice is common with the females of the
more refined parts of the continent of Europe, and with those of the
aristocracy in England.” To make this method more certain it should
be followed by the immediate syringing of the vagina with cold or
tepid water.
A fourth method is that recommended by Dr. Knowlton, rwho in his
“ Fruits of Philosophy” gives a full account of the physiological reasons
on which it is based, together with other very useful and interesting
information. He advises that a lump of either sulphate of zinc or
�X
16
alum of the size of a cheenut be dissolved in a pint of water, making
the solution weaker or stronger as it may be borne without producing
any irritation of the parts to which it is applied. This solution, which
would not lose its virtue by age, should be injected into the vagina by
means of a female syringe immediately after connexion. Two or three
*
careful and thorough applications of the syringe should be made to
ensure safety. Even quite cold water would be sufficient if thoroughly
used. The doctor gives several weighty reasons in favour of this
method, one of them being that “ it is conducive to cleanliness, and
preserves the parts from relaxation and disease.” “ Those who have
tried it affirm that they would be at the trouble of using injections
merely for the purpose of health and cleanliness.” Its only drawback
is that it generally causes a feeling of sickness in the female.
A fifth method is founded on the fact that women are most likely to
conceive within two or three days before, and twelve or fourteen days
after the menstruating period. Therefore select the least likely period.
But, as Dr. Knowlton shows by a case in point, it is very unsafe, besides
being at such a time as women least enjoy their husbands’ embraces.
For myself I think every man should prefer the withdrawal, experience
having taught that it is the only certain, and therefore the best method.
If at any time the husband in the passion of the moment, loses his
self control, it is then in the power of the wife to use injections either
with or without alum. And should the husband often forget himself,
the sponge and injections following had better be adopted. But no
strong minded, affectionate, honourable husband would give needless
trouble to his wife. But let not the wife in the freedom which her
husband gives her, seek for too many of his embraces ; temperate
enjoyment and satisfaction of the instinct is all that nature allows.
Remember that less injury results from abstinence than from excess.
It should never be indulged in when either husband or wife is tired ;
never in the morning just before getting up, but always so as to have
several hours sleep after it. If the passion of either husband or wife
is greatly in excess, measures should be taken gently and calmly to
reduce it, such as those I have indicated for voluptuous dreams, wearing
W’et bandages over the parts, sleeping in separate beds, and engaging in
diverting studies. The same course will be found beneficial to the
unmarried who may happen to have strong amative inclinations. And
whether they have or not, no better book can be in their hands than
that by Mr. George Combe, on the “ Constitution of Man.” A careful
study of its pages will enable the reader to avoid many’ of the dangers
of life, and especially aid him or her in the choice of a fit partner in
marriage. Young man, learn well the precepts enjoined by Mr. Combe;
shun a prostitute as you would a beautiful but deadly serpent; marry’
as soon as your circumstances will admit, and then act up to the
guidance you have received. My young lady reader, remember the
old proverb, “Whatever is easily gained is lightly valued.” If your
*
embraces are so cheap as to be had for the asking, do not expect your
lover to pay any higher price. The only price worth your having is
�IT
the legal safety of a marriage certificate, coupled with at least a
moderately comfortable home in which to bring forth and rear such
children as may possibly come in spite of your endeavours to the contrary.
Tiie man who strives for your embraces at a lower cost than this
would make you a slave to his lust. If he cannot for the time of
courtship be content with what I have termed nature’s temporary
substitute for the sexual act, and refrain himself before marriage,
neither will he do it afterwards when it may be absolutely necessary.
On this part of my subject I would specially commend to your attention
the following note from Mr. Combe's book: “He who loves from
amativeness alone is sensual, faithless, negligent of the happiness of
its object. He who combines with love springing from this propensity,
benevolence, veneration, justice, and intellect, will disinterestedly
promote the real happiness of the object of his affection.” From
Mr. Combe learn how to distinguish such a man, and trust him
accordingly.
TUB END
�APPENDIX.
THE CONSTITUTION OF MAN, considered in Relation to
External objects. By George Combe. Price 2s.
Extracts from the preface.—“ The great object of the following Treatise is to
exhibit several of the most important natural laws, and their relations and consequences,
with a view to the improvement of education and the regulation of individual and
national conduct.” “ I have endeavoured to avoid religious controversy. ‘ The object
of Moral Philosophy,’ says Mr. Stewart, ‘is to ascertain the general rules of a wise
and virtuous conduct in life, in so far as these rules may be discovered by the unassisted
light of nature; that is, by an examination of the principles of the human constitution,
and of the circumstances in which man is placed.’ The present Treatise Is a humble
attempt to pursue the same plan. I confine my observations exclusively to Man as he
exists in the present world, and beg that, in perusing the subsequent pages, this
explanation may be constantly kept in view. In conseqence of forgetting it, my
language has occasionally beon misapprehended, and my objects misrepresented.
When I speak of man's highest interest, for example, I uniformly refer to man as be
exists in this world; but as the same God presides over both the temporal and eternal
Interests of the human race, it seems to me demonstrably certain, that what is
conducive to the one, will in no instance impede the other, but will in general be
favourable to it also.”
ELEMENTS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE ; or Physical, Sexual, and
Natural Religion. An Exposition of the True Cause and only
Cure of the Three Primary Social Evils:—Poverty, Prostitution,
and Celibacy. By A Doctor of Medicine. 600 pages, 2s. 6d.,
or in cloth 3s., post free.
“This book is the Bible of the Body. It is the founder of a great moral reform.
It is the pioneer of health, peace, and virtue. It should be a household Lar in every
home. Read it, study it, husbands and wives. Ilad you, had your parents read a
book like this, a diseased, dwarfed, deteriorated race would not now be wasting away
in our country. By reading this wonderful book every young man may preserve hi,
health and his virtue. Some will say the disclosures are exciting or indelicate—not
so; they are true, and the noblest guide to virtue and honour. That book must be
read, that subject must be understood, before the population can be raised from its
present degraded, diseased, unnatural, and immoral state. We really know not
how to speak sufficiently highly of this extraordinary work; we can only say,
conscientiously and emphatically, it is a blessing to the human race."—People's
Paper. By Ernest Jones, Barrister.
“ Though quite out of the province of our journal, we can.' -efrain from stating
that this work is unquestionably the most remarkable one in u._ .* respects we have
ever met with. The anonymous author is a physician, who has ..•ought his special
knowledge to bear on some of the most intricate problems of social life. He lays bare
to the public, and probes with an unsparing hand, the sores of society, caused by
anomalies in the relation of the sexes. Though we differ toto do from the author
in his views of religion and morality, and hold some of his remedies to tend rather
to a dissolution than a reconstruction of society, yet we are bound to admit tlie
benevolence and philanthropy of his motives. The scope of the work is nothing
lees than the whole field of political economy.”—The British Journal of Homoeopathy,
January, i860. (Published Quarterly. Price 5r.)
*
�MORAL PHYSIOLOGY; a Brief and Plain Treatise on the
Population Question, or how to regulate the numbers in a family.
By Robert Dale Owen, author of Footfalls on the Boundary
of another World. A new Edition, with Frontispiece. Price Gcf.
FRUITS OF PHILOSOPHY; or, the Private Companion of Young
Married People. By Dr. Knowlton. Price Gd.
THE LAWS AND CUSTOMS RELATING TO MARRIAGE.
A Paper read before the Dialectical Society. By Richard Harte.
With an Appendix. 94 pages. Price Is.
LOGIC AND UTILITY; the Tests of Truth and Falsehood, and
of Right and Wrong. 134 pages. Price GJ.
ANALYSIS OF THE INFLUENCE OF NATURAL RELIGION
on the Temporal Happiness of Mankind. By Philip Beauchamp
(a pseudonym adopted by G. Grote, the Historian of Greece).
123 pp., D. GJ., in cloth boards, 2s.
THE JESUS CHRIST OF J. S. MILL.
By Antichrist. 90 pp. Is
“ He is Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son, and confesseth not that
Jesus Christ is come in the flesh."—John, ii. 22, iv. 2, 3, and John, 7.
VOLTAIRE’S PHILOSOPHICAL TALES, ROMANCES, AND
SATIRES, containing:—Candide; or, the Optimist. Zadig; or, Fate.
The World as it Goes; or, the Vision of Babouc. Mieromegas, a
Comic Romance. The Huron; or, Pupil of Nature. Johnny; or,
the Sage and the Atheist. The Man of Forty Crowns. The
Princess of Babylon. Memnon, the Philosopher. The White Bull.
Plato’s Dream. Bababec. A Conversation with a Chinese. The
Black and the White.
The Ignorant Philosopher.
Indian
Adventure. Lord Chesterfield’s Ears. The Origin of Trades.
Price 2s. GJ., stiff boards, 31G pages, double columns.
NEW RELIGIOUS THOUGHTS. By Douglas Campbeit. Second
Edition, revised. 430 pp., cloth boards. This heretical work was
published by Williams and Norgate at 5s.; E. Truelove having
purchased a large remainder, offers it, neatly bound, for 2$. Gd.
REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE FESTIVAL IN
COMMEMORATION OF THE CENTENARY BIRTHDAY OF
ROBERT OWEN, the Philanthropist, at Freemasons’ Hall, May
16th, 1871; with a full report of the speeches of the Chairman,
W. Pare, Esq., F.S.S.; Lloyd Jones; Mrs. Ernestine Le Rose,
of New York; G. J. Ilolyoake; Henry Jeffrey; Dr. Travis;
Moncure D. Conway; James Watson; and J. B. Langley. LL.D.;
to which is added Robert Owen’s “Outline of the Rational
System of Society.” 40 pp. Gd,
�The Immortality of the Soul Philosophi
cally considered.
Seven Lectures by Robert Cooper.
Price Is.
The Laws and Customs relating to Mar
riage. A Paper read before the “ Dialectical Society.” By
Richard Harte. With an Appendix. 94 pages. Price Is.
Revealed Religion: its Claims on the
Intellect and on the Heart, impartially discussed in a series of
letters from a Father to his Son. By a Wrangler and ex-member
of the University of Cambridge. Price C>d.
False Divinities; or, Moses, Christ, and
Mahomet, and other Religious Deceptions.
logist. Price Is.
By a Foreign Theo-
Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary. The
edition in six, reprinted in two thick volumes.
a Memoir. Price 8s.
Two Portraits and
Thomas Paine’s Complete Theological
Works, including “ The Age of Reason.” Miscellaneous and
Poetical Works, Last Will and Testament, and a Portrait of the
Author. Price, in Wrapper, 2s.; Cloth, 3s.; “ Age of Reason,”
with Portrait, Is.
Mirabaud’s System of Nature. Price 2s.;
in Cloth, 2s. 6d.
The Elements of Social Science, or Physi
cal, Sexual, and Natural Religion. An Exposition of the True
Cause and only Cure of the Three Primary Social Evils—Poverty,
Prostitution, and Celibacy. By a Graduate of Medicine, 600
pages, 2s. 6d.; or in Cloth, 3s., post free.
“A very valuable book. This is, we believe, the only book that has fully,
honestly, and in a philosophical spirit recognised all the elements in the problem ;
—IIow are mankind to triumph over poverty, with its train of attendant evils?—
and featlessly endeavoured to find apractical solution.”—The Examiner, Jan., 1873.
An Edition of the “ Elements of Social Science ” may be had in
French, German, and Italian. 3s. each.
Orders to the amount of One Shilling or upwards sent Post Free.
E. TRUELOVE, BOOKSELLER, 256, HIGH HOLBORN, LONDON.
�256, HIGH HOLBORN,
('Nearly opposite Day <fc Martin's, and the Royal Amphitheatre.)
Instituted 1852, for the publication of Freethought in Politics and
Religion, New and Second-hand.
OLTAIRE’S PHILOSOPHICAL DICTIONARY. Reprinted verbatim
V from the Six vol. edition, sold at 50s. The work is embellished with
two Engravings, a Medallion Portrait, and a full length likeness of the cele
brated author, in elegant cloth binding. Two volumes, containing nearly
1,300 pages, price 8s., post free. May be had of all booksellers.
Opinion or the “ Dispatch.”
*
• Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary.—This is a translation, in two volumes, of that magnificent
work which must hand the name of Voltaire down to the latest posterity. We have compared it
with the French edition in three volumes, and find that the English version is a most faithful one,
fully preserving the spirit of the original, and in no way abridged. The work is, of course, a very
valuable one, and should have a place on the shelves of all persons who accumulate useful books.
It is printed in a clear, legible type, and in a manner to be easy of reference. The publisher has
done very wisely to compress the entire contents of this encyclopaedia into two volumes of con
venient size, inasmuch as he places an admirable work within the reach of those persons whose
means would not permit them to procure a larger and more expensive edition. It is impossible to
contemplate this ‘Dictionary’ without being struck by the Grandeur and comprehensiveness of
that intellect which, alone and unassisted, could produce a work embracing so many and such varied
subjects. Ingenious theories, exposures of historical or popular fallacies, philosophical essays,
physics, metaphysics, in a word, all branches of learning, science and art, are the topics which
evoked the brilliant wit, or tested the profound wisdom of France’s greatest philosopher. Although
much of the philosophy of that school to which Voltaire belonged has been since exploded;
although many of his theories have been displaced by others which have been supported by
arguments or proved by experiments of which he never dreamt; although, in fine, much ot his
reasoning on physics is now pointless, yet on the whole, and taken as a whole, the * Philosophical
Dictionary ’ is most valuable and most useful, not only as the recordof a great man’s opinions, but
also in those very many departments where his comments and observations do really apply to tho
affairs or circumstances of the present day. We are glad to find that an English publisher has
dared to do justice to a man who is much calumniated by our English saints and hypocrites, and
we cordially recommend this edition of the ‘ Philosophical Dictionary ’ to our readers.”
Paine’s Theological Works; including the “Age of Reason” and all
his miscellaneous pieces and poetical works ; his last will and tes
tament, and a Steel Portrait. To prevent disappointment, ask
for Truelove’s Edition. In Wrappers, 2s. Cloth Boards...........
The Age of Reason; complete, including ;.n essay on his Life and
Genius, with Portrait .................................................................................
A Large Portrait of Paine, 12 inches by 9. Sharp’s Line Engraving
from Romney. Post free.............................................................................
3
0
1
0
1
0
“ It is a very superior engraving, and the best likeness of the great politician extant.—Reasoner.
Paine’s Common Sense ......................................................................................
Paine’s Rights of Man. A reply to Burke on the French Revolution
Political Wives ; a satire, by a Fantastical Fellow. An argument for
Woman’s enfranchisement. Just published .....................................
0
1
3
0
0
4
John Stuart Mill on Liberty.................
-------------------------- On Representative Government ..........................
--------- :--------------- Principles of Political Economy...............
On the Subjection of Women .....................................
----------- -------------- On England and Ireland ................................................
Renan-’s Life of Jesus. Unabridged ......................................................
Renan on the Apostles. Just published ................................
Mirabaud’s System of Nature, 2s.; or in cloth boards........................
Valse Divinities: or Moses, Christ, and Mahomet. 84 p-'p., 8 vo
1 4
2 0
5... 0
5 0
2 0
1.... 6
7 6
2 6
1 0
�JUST PUBLISHED, Price 2s. 6d.,
A GERMAN translation of the elements of social science,
*
..
ENTITLED
DIE GllUNDZUGE DEE GESELLSCHAFTSWISSENSCIIAFT;
Oder, Physisclie, Gesclilcctliche und Natiirliehe Religion. By a
Doctor of Medicine. London: E. Truelove, 256, High Holborn.
Berlin : Elwin Staude, 23, Schumannstrasse.
OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.
“ The motto of the work: ‘ The diseases of society can, no more than corporeal
maladies, be prevented or cured, without being spoken about in plain language,’
(John Stuart Mill) and its dedication to the poor and the suffering are sufficient to
show the tendency of the author. He uses indeed, a directness of expression, an out
spokenness, which is seldom met with in our times, and will probably in most circles
of so-called refined society bo styled very shocking if not cynical, though in reality it
is not so. The author only calls by their names things which we medical men also
have to discuss openly among ourselves md with patients, but which are treated
by polite society according to the Parisian proverb, ‘ ca se fait, mais ca ne se dit
pas.’ The author, as appears from the title and from his professional knowledge,
is a medical practitioner. He merits therefore the attention of his colleagues, the
more so because, io the first place, they would scarcely guess from the title that this
is a book for medical men—and secondl', because his medical colleagues alone
possess the education which permits them to estimate without prejudice the aims
and efforts of the author, to try the truth of the facts which he lays down as pre
mises, and, after due consideration, cither to accept, or reject, or to limit, and amend
his conclusions and proposals. . . The author’s remarks on the social question s
in general, are among the best and most deeply-felt we have ever read.”
Medizinische Jalirbilcher,
Bd. 152, Hft. 1.
" One must first accustom himself to the openness with which the author treats
his themes ; but the work is unquestionably most instructive and interesting, and
is written with great knowledge of the subject.”
u
Hessischc Morgenzeitung.
Dec. 24th 1871.
“ No one, who has turned his thoughts to the solution of the most burning of all
questions of the day, the social question, and who wishes to devote to it his mental
and practical energies, will be able to leave unread this book, whose anonymous
author, basing himself on the Malthusian essay ‘ on the Principle of Population,’
deduces from it with keen logic a peculiar and most striking theory on the cure of
the three primary social evils—poverty, prostitution, and celibacy . . . Whatever maybe said against this fearless laying bare of the most intimate relations of
social life and against his whole theory, purely and undisguisedly materialistic as
it is—even the opponent of the daring socialist will be unable to deny him the merit
of scientific closeness of reasoning, and what is quite as important, of warm and
zealous philanthropy; he will rather honour the moral courage and mental
energy which the author must have had to work his way out of the bewildering
maze of hitherto unsolved problems and conflicts, to a conviction so logically con
sistent, so luminous, and yet so opposed to established institutions and to the moral
sentiments in which men have been brought up.”
Konigsberge Hartungsche Zeitung. Dec. 4th 1S71.
“Many of the author’s views are diametrically opposed to our own, but we cannot
refrain from describing the book as in very truth an epoch-making one, whose
perusal must interest in the highest degree, both the professional man and the
educated general reader. The questions treated by the author are infinitely import
ant and pressing, and the purest benevolence breathes in every line . . . No
thing is gained by a prudish avoidance of the subjects treated in the work ; they
must be discussed, and mankind might congratulate themselves if this were always
done in so candid and disinterested a manner as by the author of ‘ The Elements of
Social Science.’ ”
Hanoversche Anzeigen und Morgenzeitung,
Nov. 14tli 1871.
“ The work embraces the whole field of political economy, and any one who has
ever reflected on these subjects, nay, who has only gone out on the market of life
with open eyes, must admit that humanimisery exists to an immense extent, and that
the contrasts are so frightful and abrupt, that there must come a levelling or an
overthrow. The proposals of the author, who seems as well versed in the pathology
of the human body as in that of society generally—for the prevention of the evil,
are often in direct opposition to our own views of morality; but we must acknow
ledge that the most dangerous paths are indicated with pure intent, the most daring
proposals made in a benevolent spirit. . . . We confess that, in our opinion
too, the courage to give open instruction on the innermost questions is a require
ment of the time, for here it is not knowledge, but error, which is death."
Schlcsische Zeitung.
Dec. ~th 1871.
�A DISCOVERY
OF TUF.
ORIGIN, EVIDENCES, AND EARLY HISTORY
OF
OvtWamiiL
NEVER YET BEFORE OR ELSEWHERE SO FULLY AND
FAITHFULLY SET FORTH.
ev
THE Rev. R. TAYLOR, A.B. & M.R.C.S.
QiXurftav St rw p.iu xxrx (frvinv, u Sx/riXtv, tvcuvi xcu xtrrx^ou- rnv St
SioxXuruu iixtTMVTXv raeatrou.—■ Euphrates Ehilosopfi ad Vespasian. imp
qiK'd Apollonii Tvan<g Mi: acuta: citante Lardnera, Vol. IV'. p, 261.
THIRD EDITION.
LONDON?
PUBLISHED BY E. TRUELOVE,
�Price Fourpence.
THE
IGNORANT PHILOSOPHER,
LORD CHESTERFIELD’S EARS,
A TRUE STORY,
AND
OTHER HUMOUROUS
PIECES,
TRANSLATED FROM THE FRFNJH
OF
M. DE VOLTAIRE,
LONDON:
E.
TRUELOVE,
256,
HIGH
HOLBORN,
W.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Individual, family and national poverty : reasons why in every family the number should be regulated; the methods that have been proposed, extensively adopted, and found to answer for doing it; together with a few valuable hints for the young
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Palmer, John Henry
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 17, [4] p. ; 19 cm.
Notes: Part of the NSS pamphlet collection. Publisher's advertisements on unnumbered pages at the end.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
E. Truelove
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1875
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N529
Subject
The topic of the resource
Birth control
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Individual, family and national poverty : reasons why in every family the number should be regulated; the methods that have been proposed, extensively adopted, and found to answer for doing it; together with a few valuable hints for the young), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
NSS
Population Increase
Poverty-Great Britain
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/55f4dc6e85246257b396b2984fc11b11.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=jR5pbvoNCzMJl%7E%7E4jVL8zyYnmQrWArpEwXi6uKmg4rMIirCqZD1yUVUQZ6gwRwQbEqyHbw9A22NBqeX6MzGrB%7EoAM%7EthH8dCk45mHZQsznrL1g%7E52XdEkcOCgG6sP42cn%7EalD%7EnqTSWRqlFoP%7EVan8-MLaa5Cvg%7Eu-LCfUJKYTbkymsoq2xyFvmiI38vqPxM3w6Bb-v9LQx0xEmN-HHWRLF11iLpJLPvVhLVyFIYRDYsh6Sk1DtBt4iwbOKqdSTLh22jtZD1JE6Uwv6-EQCBpCiVi2Be8svz-LU3Ac9-f6GP4RTM7F3E9W5z0x1T%7ERkHB8XdxRjcDZt7e94EUFauGg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
2c6539390e8c37fb8db3d89541608751
PDF Text
Text
M4-73
national secular society
PRICE ONE PENNY. J
MARRIED LIFE:
COMFORT OR MISERY?
Qvamati#
TC AyFj
)
Mary ( married ladies.
Ethel
an unmarried lady.
Ethel (entering to Kate). How are you, Kate ? What an
age it seems since I saw you, and how well you look! Not a
day older, I declare, than on your wedding day—how long ago
is that now ?
Kate. Almost six years. I am so glad to see you, dear;
but I can’t return your compliments : you seem to be thinner?
and what is the meaning of those dark rings under your eyes ?
Ethel. Oh! that’s nothing; I am quite well; I used to be
too fat.
Kate. What rubbish! you were just right, and you look
depressed, too.
Ethel. That’s all your fancy, Kate! I’m all right, but tell
me about yourself: how have you been all this time ? What a
lovely little room you have got! Where did you get that
beautiful dado ? It’s hand-painted, I do believe. Oh ! you
extravagant woman, is it for this your poor husband toils in
the city ?
Kate. Spare my blushes, and don’t be so severe. That’s
il a, little thing of my own”, and cost me.about ten shillings
for colors.
�Ethel. You don’t say so ! "What made you so awfully
clever? I don’t seem to remember anything of the kind at.
school.
Kate. Well 1 I did take the second prize for drawing in our
last term, though you don’t seem to remember it; but that
was eight years ago, and I have been taking lessons ever since.
Ethel. Curiouser and curiouser I It is borne in upon me
that you used to hate every kind of lessons.
Kate. Your memory is painfully accurate this time, but I
had a reason. But talking of school, do you remember Mary
Burns ?
Ethel. Oh! quite well—a pretty, fair girl, with a lovely
complexion; she was extraordinarily High Church, wasn’t
she ? and used to fast, and appear unexpectedly in black, and
sit up at night keeping vigils, or some queer thing of that sort.
What about her ?
Kate. She lives here, and I expect her every minute. When
I got your note I asked her to come too, poor thing! I thought
she would enjoy a chat over old times.
Ethel. Why, what’s the matter with her ?
Kate. Wait till you see her: you will soon find out. You
know she is married; her husband is Mr. Crossley, a curate
here.
Ethel. A curate, is he ? I suppose they are not just
rolling in wealth ?
Kate. They are not. Here she is, I think; don’t remark
on her looks. {A servant shows in Mrs. Crossley..) Well,
Mary dear, here you are; I was afraid you could not come
after all, and I would not pour out the tea, because I wanted
you to have the best cup. Try this chair, we have just got it,
and it’s delightful.
Mary. You are always so kind, Kate. I thought I should
never get away. Just as I was ready, the baby woke and
screamed, and Bessy was washing up, and I had to take him;
and then Emmie fell down stairs, and hurt her head lather
badly, so that stopped me again; and then, just at the door,
the baker met me with his bill, and I had to persuade him---Why, Ethel, is that you? What a start you gave me, I was
afraid it was a stranger.
Ethel. It’s the first time I have been considered a terrify
ing object, and I am rather flattered. I am very glad to see
you, Mary. What changes there have been since we last met
in that dingy old s*chool-room! Do you remember how glad
�( 3 )
we all were to get away from it ? And all the ridiculous plans
we used to make about our future lives. You were to be a
nun, Kate was to go about lecturing on woman’s rights, and I
was always carnally-minded, and intended to marry the first
* man I met, provided he was young, had a Greek profile, Spanish
-eyes and the curliest black hair (I think we called it hyacinthine locks then), and was six foot four, and possessed six
thousand a year, and came of a noble family. You will be
surprised to hear that I have not met him yet, and I begin to
doubt if that sort are quite as common as they were when I
was seventeen.
Mary. How you do rattle on! You have not lost your
good spirits, evidently. As for your hero, if you can find a
man with six thousand a year, take him ; if he were as ugly as
sin and as old as Methusaleh, never mind; nothing is so dreadBful as poverty.
Ethel. Oh I Mary: you don’t mean that seriously, surely;
I and, besides, I am engaged, only mother says we are too poor
to marry.
Mary. Ethel, take my advice, don't yaexTy a poor man!
Take warning by me: I married a poor man for love, and have
' repented it ever since. I thought if we gave up luxuries and
I lived very quietly, we could manage: but I did not reckon on
I having five children in six years.
Kate. Mary, you know you need not have had them.
Mary. Kate, don’t talk so; I can’t bear to hear you. I
know what you mean, but these things are in God’s hands,
and we must submit to His will. If my husband knew you
had mentioned such a thing to me, he would be very angry, and
perhaps stop my coming here any more. But, Ethel, do listen
to me; my life is nothing but a burden; often I wish I were
I in my grave; we can only afford one servant, and no good
■servant would work in such a household as ours. I never get
half the sleep I want, and I’m sure no London maid-of-all-work
does as much as I do. I often sit up half the night mending
and making, and that’s not all. Two years ago my little Eddie
died; he was only ill two or three days, and we owed the doctor
Hso much I did not like to send for him again; and when at
last I did, it was too late. It was inflammation of the lungs,
and he said Eddie’s life might have been saved if he had seen
him earlier. I shall never forgive myself. And when we
buried him, we could not afford even the plainest tombstone.
It is the same with everything; we can’t pay our way. You
�( 4 )
heard me speak of the baker just now; you would not believe
the. degrading things I have had to do, to coax tradesmen into
waiting for their money. I never can overtake my work ; it’s
useless to attempt it. As to books, I have not opened one for
years.
Ethel. And your singing—you had such a sweet voice.
Mary. Singing ! we can’t afford a piano ; I have forgotten
it all. That would be nothing, but I can’t keep the place even I
clean, and the children never get all the milk they should, and
this is my best dress—just look at it I And just look at me,
did you ever see such a fright as I have grown ? But I could
bear it all if it were not for my husband, he looks so wretchedly
ill, and he is not half warmly enough dressed. If he could but
have a great-coat this winter, but I know it is impossible, and
then he slaves day and night at any literary work he can get,
even copying he does. But, oh I Kate, the worst is still to be
told : another baby is coming, and the last two are so delicate,
what will this one be ? And how can I do more than I do now ?
(Mary breaks down and sobs; Ethel tries to comfort her, and
Kate leaves the room, and returns with a glass of port wine.)
Kate. Now, Mary, drink this; there, you will feel better
directly. Come and lie on the sofa a little.
Mary. Dear Kate, thank you; but I must go home—I don’t
know wbat the children may be doing. I ought not to have
stayed so long. Good bye, dear; good bye, Ethel, and remem
ber what I have said. {Exit Mary.)
Ethel. Oh, Kate, what a shocking story! And how ill
she looks, and how miserable! I don’t think I should have
known her. And I’m afraid she is right, and one ought not to
marry a poor man. To live as Mary describes, I am sure
would just kill me. I don’t think I am very selfish, but I
■could not give up every comfort like that, and with it all to be
so miserable. And I am sure it would drive Jack into a lunatic
asylum! Kate : what ought we to do ? We have been engaged I
five years, and I sometimes think Jack is getting tired of it—H
his letters are colder now. Oh! I wish he were as well off as
your husband; if Jack and I could have a smart little house
like this, we should want nothing better.
Kate. I thought something was wrong, and I am glad you
told me. Who is “Jack ” ?
Ethel. J ack Dawson : he is a doctor, but only beginning to I
practise, and-------Kate. Why, I know Mr. Dawson very well, and like him
�U )
iso much. I knew he was engaged, but had no notion it was
to you. I do congratulate you-—he is one of the nicest men I
know.
Ethel. I thank you, dear, but I don’t know that there is
much to congratulate us on, for I don’t see a chance of our
getting married for years, and I’m not exactly growing younger.
Kate. You are twenty-five, I think, and Mr. Dawson, I
know, is twenty-seven. He was here the other day, talking
over his prospects with Fred; and now I have good news for
you, Ethel—Mr. Dawson and my husband are making almost
exactly the same income.
Ethel. Kate! What! Oh! I can't believe it. Do you
mean to say you are living on the sum Jack earns now ?
Kate. Yes; and, what is more, Mr. Crossley, who is so
steeped in poverty, has very nearly the same. Within three
=or four pounds, I believe, the three incomes are exactly similar.
Ethel. I am more astonished than I can say. Then is it
simply the children that make the enormous difference between
you and Mary ? Why, I thought you were quite rich.
Kate. It is as I say; but then our income is divided by
two, while theirs is divided by seven already.
Ethel. Ah ! yes; but that simply means that you are
lucky to have no family.
Kate. You should say, how wise I am.
Ethel. Kate, what did you mean by telling Mary she need
not have had them ? Can one really prevent it ? Do tell me
(truly, because, if one can, Jack and I might marry to morrow.
K ate. I am anxious to tell you the truth. It can be done :
-it’ only requires perseverance; and if you make up your mind
to marry, I will tell you all about it.
Ethel. Oh! Kate, how can I thank you—I was so un
happy! Mother had just shown me a letter from that horrid
Mrs. Grundy, and she said: “You are never going to let Ethel
marry that wild young Jack Dawson.” And then—oh ! I can’t
"tell you what she said; and I don’t believe it; but I know
Jack is vexed with me for delaying our marriage so long.
Kate. Never mind Mrs. Grundy. Fred knows Mr. Daw
son well, and I know there is nothing for you to be alarmed at.
But, remember, he is not the stuff out of which ascetics or
hermits are made—nor, for that matter, is Fred. I should not
like it if he were. But we married very young, and I am certain
Fred has never thought of another woman in that way, although
lie is good friends with several. Then I am always well and
�able to go out with him; and, though I say it, I don’t believethere is a prettier or more comfortable home in England than
his; so what temptation has he to be wild or fast ?
Ethel. But, Kate, why did Mary say her husband thinks
it so wrong ? Ought one not to believe what a clergyman says?’J
Kate. I cannot see why Mr. Crossley’s opinion should have
more weight than yours or mine. This is not a question of re-£
ligious dogma, but of morality and the welfare of the human,
race, in which questions we are all equally interested.
Ethel. But suppose Jack agreed with him.
Kate. In that case you had better not marry; but it is
very unlikely. Jack is a really well-educated and thoughtful
man, and all advanced thought in the present day tends in thisdirection. But, if you Eke, Fred shall find out casually in con
versation, what his views are, and I will tell you.
Ethel. I wish he would; but, Kate, how did you find this
out ?
Kate. You know my old aunt Dorothy. In her youth shewas engaged to a young man for ten years, and then he jilted'
her, and married a young girl. She was dreadfully heart
broken, and has spent her life almost in propagating these;
ideas. She wrote a book about it, and when I became engaged
she gave Ered a copy to read, and when he told her he thought
it very sensible, and that he agreed with every word, she
urged us to marry. And we did. You see the result. But
that is not all. I have plenty of leisure time, and I earn money I
too. Fred’s earnings supply the necessaries and a fair amount
of comfort; mine supply my dress and all the little luxuries
you see round us, and keep a cot in the children’s hospital be
sides. If I had a family to attend to, I could not earn any
thing, for I should not have time.
Ethel. How do you earn money, Kate; could I ?
Kate. Very likely you could. I earn money by my draw
ings. You were admiring my dado : I have painted three others
in different drawing rooms, and was well paid for it. I paint
screens, too, and design Christmas cards by the score. I paint
menus and programmes and all sorts of things. And I take a
lesson every week; I work between three and four hours a day,
and I like it.
Ethel. Well, I can’t draw, but I can make lace. I soldsome the other day at fifteen shillings a yard at a fancy bazaar,
and I overheard the purchaser saying that she thought it cheap
at the price. I know I could help in that way; but, Kate,
�(&t)
would you not like to have children ? I do love them so.
Kate. Yes, I should, but we can’t afford it yet. I am only
I twenty-five, and there is plenty of time. When we can afford
■t I hope to indulge in one or two. I am sure it would be
wrong to have a large family.
Ethel. But why, if you could afford it ?
Kate. Because the country is too full now, and we should
"■do wrong to add to the pressure of competition, which is already
I too great.
Ethel. Kate, how clever you are; I never heard anyone
else talk like this.
Kate. I’m not a bit clever, and my ideas are all second- Kand: but you see I have time to read and improve myself, and
I have read a good deal since we married.
rj Ethel. Well, you have taken a great weight off my mind;
I but what will mother say to all this ?
Kate. You must, of course, use your own discretion about
telling her; but you are old enough to please yourself, and
remember you must choose between her and Jack. When she
sees that you are happy and comfortable, she will surely be
content.
Ethel. Yes, I suppose so—at least that is all she can want
yor me. And now I must go. Good-bye, dear Kate ; I am so
much obliged to you, and I’ll come and see you' again very
< soon. (Exit Ethel.)
I Kate (soliloquises). I think I have smoothed her way a little.
I wish everyone were as quick and sensible. Nothing can be
done for those poor Crossleys: one can’t get them to listen to
reason; and what a dreadful example for a clergyman to set I
Their case is hopeless; but Ethel is different, and for her I
I foresee both a useful and a happy life.
A. Bosneb, Printer, 34, Bouveris Street, London, E.C.
�LIST
OF
BOOKS .
SOLD BY
W. H. REYNOLDS, Publisher, New Cross, London, S.E.
(Sent through the POST ONLY).
THE LAW OF POPULATION. By Annie Besant. A work
designed to induce married people to limit their families
within the means of subsistence. Post free, 8d.
THE WIFE’S HANDBOOK: How a Woman should order
herself during Pregnancy, in the Lying-in Room, and after
Delivery ; with Hints on the Management of the Baby, and
on other matters of importance necessary to be known by
Married Women. By Dr. H. A. Allbutt. Post free, 8d.
THE ELEMENTS OF SOCIAL SCIENCE. The most com
plete work on sexual matters ever published. Should be read
by every adult. Bound in cloth, 604 pages. Post free, 3s. 4d.
THE POPULATION QUESTION. By Dr. C. R. Drysdale,
President of the Malthusian League. Post free, Is. Id.
LIFE AND WRITINGS OF T. R. MALTHUS. By Dr. C.
R. Drysdale, President of the Malthusian League. With
portrait of Malthus. Post free, Is. Id.
GOD’S VIEWS ON MARRIAGE. By Annie Besant. Post
free, 3d.
THE RADICAL REMEDY IN SOCIAL SCIENCE; or,
Borning Better Babes through Regulating Reproduction by
Controlling Conception. By Dr. E. B. Foote. Post free, Is. Id.
EARLY MARRIAGE AND LATE PARENTAGE: The only
Solution of the Social Problem. By Oxoniensis. Post free, 4d.
SOCIAL ASPECTS OF MALTHUSIANISM. By Annie
Besant. Post free, 2d.
POVERTY: Its Cause and Cure. By M. G. H. Post free, 2d.
WHY DO MEN STARVE? By C.Bradlaugh. Post free, 2d.
LABOR’S PRAYER. By C. Bradlaugh. Post free, 2d.
POVERTY : Its Effects on the Political Condition of the People.
By C. Bradlaugh. Post free, 2d.
THE MALTHUSIAN: A Crusade against Poverty. The
monthly organ of the Malthusian League. Post free, l|d.
MALTHUSIAN LEAFLETS.—A packet will be sent on receipt
of postage to any person who will undertake to distribute
them.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Married life : comfort or misery?
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 7 p. ; 19 cm.
Note: Publisher's list on back cover (books sold by W.H. Reynolds, Publisher, New Cross, London, S.E.). Printed by A. Bonner. Written in the form of a dramatic conversation between two married ladies and an unmarried lady. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
W.H. Reynolds
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[191-?]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N475
Subject
The topic of the resource
Marriage
Birth control
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
[Unknown]
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Married life : comfort or misery?), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
Marriage
NSS
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/0690ae8eee2bd5b8e87d2113d6d73587.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=vwXVKb9STkXSJnkFDZhH8XzVXJ%7EoxGCpXWd1yWFMXCxeldEe50IqtEG5CEUbwV6ogDisqr93EwGEc3kxlSYSgIsjF5DTE6dT511Hqtjo8x2JWB9eatT5INGQ8xNZRK4tJr7Tg%7EX61p2%7EeFeYESiXFUoYbwUIhZrwxL8Gt5PnvqnEm%7E8lhB98uc%7EPfNCR35hY-t19mGPsbTELbbxcvaWb2IUHgpYG9aqXB15WcdCVa08VGrVHDIfUJaajYFJNedY3nX5JZRhvoBEkVrMepdQhmebw5hcwgf2qE0ypY-ZGx2DEu%7Ej6QhViA6L7sJJm1sDbIpoQolahLOqdyMQi-RGE3Q__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
5bb83408924f76106fd19bfac8a83ba8
PDF Text
Text
������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The life and writings of Thomas R. Malthus
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Drysdale, Charles Robert [1874-1961.]
Malthus, T. R. (Thomas Robert) [1766-1834.]
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 120 p. ; 18 cm.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Geo. Standring
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1892
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G4996
Subject
The topic of the resource
Malthusianism
Birth control
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (The life and writings of Thomas R. Malthus), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
Population
Population Increase
Thomas R Malthus
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/714f94f00334eae281173238a0a5b8c5.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=F8Od9xpQduTqv7tJ5EIdi9uTKE0sidxRIdbBmHOKvWqx%7EqLQYfc650uJZlEnNt8Zcm9PIrMVpcqbXdc-0EGBDW12Fb9r6srm%7EWsx8jGfJEo7AXbZi%7EQCC-FTE4KQHaojYjFcCM-tsjpFTTONh48ZpJsI5yZuuLmNkTWVWRY-SIC27%7E9g1fv6I4L9YfcxOO295yHeGz%7E-Cy0RxJ0bcPilF549dw7uAgHmfaROtIkiEqR13Oy6eTiSkOPkR2BWLmQvNwJhNd4rEK%7EsdXkSfAbOfCnbQ3jYMWH2UIXKyErox9FBXCzMGOWSwovNk16ZiBY2hN2%7EX2Dz4jV14TADWratmw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
2fb0683fc830402415c5a739bb134ea5
PDF Text
Text
■ 7'7,
•'■fu
LARGE OR SMALL FAMILIES?
ON WHICH SIDE LIES
THE BALANCE OF COMFORT?
BY AUSTIN HOLYOAKE.
To be publicly known as a Freethinker is not respectable, to be suspected
of Atheism is monstrous, and to be an avowed Malthusian is detestable!
These are weighty reasons why a man who wishes to- be “ thought well of
by his neighbours,” and who is “quite sure the world will go on well
enough without his interference,” should hold his peace, make money, and
die in the odour of respectable sanctity “universally regretted by a large
circle of acquaintances.*’ But to some men conscience is higher than
consequence. This may be their misfortune, but they are afflicted with the
infirmity of speaking out what they think, because they are infatuated
enough to imagine that what they have to say may benefit others. There
are the names of many men in history who have done this thing, generally
to their own loss, but to the world’s great advantage.
Without the vanity of insinuating that what I may say will ever be
recorded in history, and knowing that the force of the argument of the
present paper can only apply to certain states of society in certain coun
tries, I wish to record for the first time convictions which I have enter
tained for many years, believing and hoping sincerely that they will be
productive of benefit and not of evil to others.
That most delicate of all subjects, the Population Question, the news
papers generally shun lest they should lose caste, and the medical periodi
cals are dead against it. But then it is a question which presses for
solution more and more every day, and which underlies the happiness of
the great mass of the population in all old and over-populated countries;
it therefore becomes imperative that some one should endeavour to point
out a remedy, or at least a palliative for the widespread misery, suffering,
and disease which are kept up and perpetuated from generation to genera
tion. This topic has been dilated upon by men whose names will
be remembered in history, and all honour to them for their courage. The
Rev. Mr. Malthus, though his views in some respects I believe to have
been radically defective, did more good by the attention he called to this
question, than by all the dogmatic sermons he ever preached. Robert
Dale Owen, the worthy son of a worthy sire, wrote his invaluable tract
entitled “Moral Physiology;” Dr. Knowlton published his pamphlet
“ Fruits of Philosophyand later has appeared a work—to which is due
the honour of having revivified Subject which had become dormant from
the close of the Socialist agitation in 1844, till the time of its appearance
— “The Elements of Social Science.” Other works treat upon population,
from Mr. John Stuart Mill’s great treatise on “ Political Economy,”
down to a penny tract entitled “ Poverty: its Cause and Cure. ” This
question is the political problem of to-day, and he who solves it will be the
most useful man of his age.
�.Large or Small Families ?
Various schemes are propounded for the amelioration of the growing
want and misery of this country, such as Home Colonisation, Emigration,
Co-operation, Trades’ Unions, and the like. All writers and statesmen
admit the fact of an increasing population, and consequently an increasing
poverty, pauperism, and starvation. But this may be taken as an absolute
truth, that no one scheme could supply an universal remedy, the causes of
poverty and suffering in our civilised mode of life being so multifarious.
I do not intend to travel over the whole field of politics, or out of this
small country of ours. I wish to narrow the question to a very small
compass, and to individualise it; here is the root of the evil, and when
the root is diseased, neither branches nor leaves can be healthy.
England is a small island, and, in proportion to the land under cultiva
tion for human food, it is over-populated No one disputes that fact
The over-population produces disease, suffering, starvation, and death.
If instead of thirty, we had twenty millions of human beings, would there
not be a better chance of health and food for all ? Home colonists say that
as long as there is land in this country, it ought to be cultivated, and then
double the present number could be maintained. This is not to be disputed.
But supposing that by some grand act of legislation, the whole land of this
country were to be suddenly distributed to the people, and made to main
tain double the present population, how long would society be in a better
state than it is now? Just twenty-five years! But supposing it took
longer, still the inevitable result would ultimately come, unless some sys
tem of regulating the population were adopted. This island is limited,
and unless the people on it consent to limit their numbers, the evils from
which we now suffer, will not only not diminish, but will go on increasing.
I am not unmindful of the disproportions and inequalities which abound,
and which must be considerably modified before anything approaching to a
rational state of society can obtain. I have always warred against the
injustice of our societary arrangements, and I believe the efforts of the
social reformers of this century have been productive of lasting good to
our race. But in the present day, in spite of all the teaching and
preaching we have had during the last half century, we find ourselves in
the midst of a more widespread misery and starvation than perhaps
England has ever known before. We talk of the sacredness of human life,
but human life shares the fate of every other “ article ” which gluts the
market—it becomes depreciated in value; and it will, as amatter of course,
never rise in value so long as the supply is abundant. England’s weak
ness at this moment is her oyerwhelming population. We devise schemes
of emigration to get rid of those who are compelled to abandon the place
of their birth, and sever the ties of kindred and home, and seek for a sub
sistence in the uncultivated wilds of a foreign land thousands of miles
away from the associates of their youth and the friends of their maturity.
Let those who think it is a good thing that the Anglo-Saxon race should
people the world, watch the poor emigrants as the ships leave our shores,
and also look into the faces of the relatives and friends whom the expa
triated are parting with for ever, and t^n say if it would not be more
humane to prevent so much agony in the world. Granted there may be
plenty of beautiful spots on this globe which are suitable for new colonies,
still it is the last duty I should consider incumbent upon me to send my
children to inhabit them. It is no concern of mine, or any man’s in
particular, whether these places are populated or not. The aborigines of
every sparsely peopled country that the Anglo-Saxon race have seized
upon to which to carry the “ blessings of rum and true religion
�Large or Small Families ?
whether it be Africa, America, Australia, New Zealand, or elsewhere—
have never had reason to believe in the righteousness of the “ pale faces ”
over-running their land; for wherever Englishmen go, there they spread
vice, disease, and death among the “ untutored savages,” and never rest
till they have exterminated the ancient possessors of the soil.
More than nine-tenths of the natives of England would prefer to
remain in the land of their birth, if they could be ensured a moderate
return for their industry. The “ roving Englishman ” is generally a
person of means, who travels about the world for his own amusement,
knowing he can return at any moment he feels “ home sick.” The great
majority of people object to leave even the town in which they have been
reared, hence the crowding of large cities, London especially. And if
this question were confined to the town-life aspect of it alone, there would
be much to be said in favour of limitation. In fact, it is here that it
presses with such peculiar force upon the thoughtful artisan, the small
tradesman, and the professional man,
A working man in London, with a large family, if he be reflective, and
a person of some refinement, cannot have a happy home. The conditions
of happiness to him do not exist. He has no privacy, and the proper de
cencies of domestic life are not at his command. His children are not
surrounded by the necessary conditions to ensure their healthy training,
either physically or mentally. His eldest boy may be his pride, and he
thinks he would make a bright man if he could be sent to a good school for
a number of years; but then there are five or six others to be considered,
and in justice to them he cannot spend money in the education of one, which
is required for the food and clothing of the others. And so that wish of his
heart is thrust down, and the boy, instead of becoming a brilliant man in
some profession, is made a carpenter, a shoemaker, or blacksmith, and is
known in after years as “ Harry Despond, who would have been a clever
fellow if he had been educated when young?” And in times of trade
disputes, when the toiler is impelled to resist some reduction in his wages,
trifling though it may seem, but which will make the difference to him
between subsistence and semi-starvation—who is it who holds out longest
in “strikes” (those battles of the poor swarms against the rich few), he
who has one or two children, or the man who “ has a large number depend
ing upon him?” The thoughtless working man supplies the weapons for
his own defeat.
The small tradesmen—that large section of the population of England
who form what is called “ the lower middle-class”—are influenced in the
same degree, though in a different way. At periods of public excitement
—it may be a municipal election, or a general election, or when some dar
ing attempt of a retrograde Government is made to wrest from the people
one of their dearly-bought liberties—if you appeal to the small tradesman
for his active co-operation in the popular cause, you are constantly met by
the reply,I would if I dared, but then you know I have a large family
dependent up me; I would not care for myself, but I am bound to think of
them. My sympathies are entirely with you, but I am obliged to keep
quiet, for it is as much as I can do to pay rent and taxes, and keep the
wolf from the door.” And so the ever-present obstacle in this island, “ a
large family,” stands in the way of education, reform, social comfort, and
a thousand necessary and desirable changes. But to what do we mainly
owe this state of things ? Why, to that pestilential doctrine derived from
the Bible, “ Increase and multiply,” which is taught in our churches
as an “ ordinance of God, ” and which has been the cause of more crime
�4
Large or Small Families ?
and anguish in England than any other false doctrine that ever cursed the
land. No one is bound to increase and multiply, excepting it be perfectly
agreeable to him and suitable to his circumstances in life. No man is
master of his fate so long as he keeps on multiplying “ circumstances”
which control him at every turn.
The class of clerks in London are numbered by the thousand. They
may be in Government departments, in laweyrs’ offices, in banks, in mer
chants’ warehouses, and other places. They have to sustain the external
appearance of gentlemen, and their incomes are fixed, or if they increase,
it is only by slow degrees, providing they remain in one establishment for
a number of years. But as domestic matters are usually managed, their
responsibilities multiply yearly, and there is no corresponding increase of
means. And all know what a misery genteel poverty is. During the first
three or four years of the married life of a poor professional man, he can
manage to live in a decent neighbourhood in town ; but as time goes on,
he must either remove into an inferior locality, or move out of town into
the suburbs, as, having a number of children, he is “ objected to on
account of his family ” in every desirable house where he wishes to occupy
apartments only. And let every man reflect hew much he loses of rest, of
time, of money, and of opportunities of instruction, of amusement, or of
friendly intercourse, by being obliged to “catch a train” or an omnibus
every night of his life; and the same anxiety and excitement have to be
repeated every morning, when he who has to pursue a daily occupation
in town is compelled, by economical considerations, to live out of it. A
physician some time ago gave it as his experience, that the mortality
among city men whs lived out of town, was greatly in excess of that among
those who lived only a walking distance from their places of business,
owing to the excitement induced by anxiety to catch the train or omnibns
night and morning.
Hitherto I have viewed this question almost entirely ffom the man’s
point of view. But that is not the whole aspect of the case. There is the
woman’s, which is quite as important, as the happiness of the world may
be said to be in her keeping. The marriage state is the only rational and
moral state for the vast majority of adult human beings, and anything that
prevents or even hinders that, injures the individual and society. But
then the advocates of unlimited families do not hesitate to praise the pru
dence of the young man who says “ he cannot marry until he has made a
position in the world.” They surely cannot reflect upon the many evils
arising from delay. Look at the state of our streets, and read the pro
ceedings of the coroners’ courts. We are taught to regard with horror the
custom in China of regulating their population by killing a certain propor
tion of the female children; but what is the condition of London, where,
Dr. Lancaster says, the hands of thousands of mothers are imbrued in the
blood of their infants, and where specimens of “ God’s image ” done to
‘death may be picked up in the squares, on door steps, and fished out of
the river between the rising and setting of every sun ? Is this a state of
things to be pleaded for, and is there no remedy to be devised to put an
end to so much brutalising demoralisation ? If persons understood tha1 it
was possible to have early marriages and small families, a marked change
would be visible in society in a few years. In the present state of the
population in England, if every adult male were to take a wife, there
would then remain an enormous number of women without husbands.
Some persons think they see in the plan of Dale Owen and others, the door
opened to wide-spread immorality. This fear would be entitled to respect
�La/rge or Small Families ?
5
if the present state of society were perfect. There is no plan on 3ny sub
ject that may not be abused. In spite of the deadly consequences arising
from immorality now, thousands upon thousands of reckless and vicious
people abound who dare all consequences. Everybody agrees that the social
problem wants solving, and that “ some remedy ought to be devised," but
very few have the courage to broach this population question, owing to the
sneers and odium they have to encounce. The remedy now proposed can
be adopted by every individual as soon as its expediency is seen.
All men, generally speaking, not only admire their own wives, but are
gratified when other people speak approvingly of their healthy and
pleasing looks after years of married life. But those men who admire their
wives most, are too often reckless of the charms which win admiration.
Constantly do we hear it said by persons when speaking of married women
—“ Ah, I knew Mrs.------ before she was married. She was one of the
prettiest girls in our neighbourhood a few years ago; but she has had
children so fast, that she is a complete wreck of her former self.” This is
of so common occurrence, that almost every adult person knows a case in
point. But how cruel all this is to the woman. No man, however philoso
phical he may be, or however “ high ” his moral principles, feels the same
interest in a faded wife, as he does in a bright and healthy one. There
are exceptions, of course, but in the overwhelming majority of cases, the
deterioration of the wife arises from the selfishness of the husband. Man first
destroys the greatest charm of his life, and then has the “ consolation" of
knowing that he is the author of his own misery. He who is blessed with
a wife who retains the bloom of youth through a number of years, glides
into the vale of life unconscious of a thousand troubles which rack the
souls of men not so fortunately circumstanced. There is much talk about
conservatism in politics; but if there were a little more thought devoted to
conservatism in domestic life, it would be better for the human race. In
married life, the domestic affections may be more perfectly realised by a
small family than a large one, and the truest love and the most generous
consideration go hand in hand.
It has been frequently maintained, that the children of large families
make better men and women than those of small ones, because, having to
go out into the world from the earliest age, they learn to “ rough it, ”
whereas the children of small families are brought up more tenderly, and
are apt to be a little pampered. It is undeniable that two children only
in a family are more likely to be better nurtured than four or six, but that
they are always spoiled thereby, is no more true than that the roughly
“dragged up” always make industrious and useful citizens. If there be
any truth in the alleged refining influence of education and good surround
ings, the balance of probabilities is against the roughly trained being so
useful in the world as the cultivated. And at what a cost is this “ rough
and vigorous ” member of society produced. The mother of a numerous
progeny risks her life eight or ten times, besides passing the best portion
of her existence in continual suffering. A grave charge made by oppo
nentsis, that to check the population is an “ abnormality,” and must im
pairs the health of both man and woman. This is not true; but if it were,
it would be easy to show that the ailments forced upon women in a
“natural” way, far exceed any possible to arise from an exercise of
prudence. In hundreds, nay thousands of families in this country, the
doctor and the undertaker are constantly in attendance; and where such
is the case, who can say that there is a “home,” in the true sense of
that term, for either the father or r >ther? With a large family, the
�6
La/rge or Small Families ?
father is never free from the harassing care of providing the means for
their bare subsistence. A working man who has to support six or eight
besides himself, has little leisure and small desire to cultivate his own mind,
and this is a fact worthy of consideration by all who wish well to the
present generation. The most delightful impulses of our mature years are
excited and called forth by the love of children, but the impulses are
always checked, and sometimes almost obliterated, when anxiety and de
privation enter the house. To preserve the happy medium is a wise
economy of the small share of happiness which falls to the lot of man.
(It must not be forgotten, that the whole of my arguments have
special reference to the working classes, of whatever degree.)
Duggan, the man who recently murdered his wife and six children,
and then committed suicide, might have been alive and compara
tively happy, and the world have been saved the remembrance of an
appalling crime, if he had had two children instead of six. He was a
journeyman silversmith with a moderate wage, and for eight persons to
be sustained out of so limited an income, meant semi-starvation, with no
education for the children, and perpetual drudgery for the mother, for how
was she to maintain a servant out of her scanty weekly allowance ? Dug
gan was a man of weakly body, and possibly weakly mind, and had he
been relieved of sixty-six per cent, of his “ responsibilities,” in all
probability he would have been able to have borne his burden through
life.
Children who are well cared for and gently reared, experience in their
early days the purest and most unalloyed happiness that life can give.
But how few members of large and poor families ever wish to pass their
childhood over again. And if one or both parents should die early, how
rarely is it that more than two or three out of a family of six or eight
ever “do well.” Their number is a bar to their prospects, and their
relatives being totally unable to provide for such a “ swarm,” they are
left to the tender mercies of an already over-stocked society, and their
destiny becomes impossible of calculation.
It is urged, that to interfere with the domestic relations, will be to press
with peculiar hardship upon the poor. I think this is a mistaken notion.
I have been endeavouring to show that the tradesman and professional
man, as well as the artisan, would be more independent with fewer “ en
cumbrances,” as the supposed child-loving population designate children;
but the poor man, in consequence of his poverty, has most to gain by pru
dence. The real objection underlying the opposition, though it is not openly
expressed, is the idea of the deprivation of pleasure supposed to be involved.
But this by no means follows. And if it were so, I think I have shown
that it would be but tbe substitution of one advantage for a greater. Earl
Russell, in a non-Parliamentary address, said, a few years ago, that life
was a “compromise.” He was certainly right, look at life as we may.
The same passion or desire, though felt by all, does not operate in all with
the same intensity. Some require more sleep than others, but they can
not indulge in it if their position in life does not admit of it. One man has
an inordinate craving for drink, but when he gratifies it at tbe expense of
his means and his sobriety, all “ society ” condemn him. Another has a
dainty appetite, and must have expensive dishes and plenty of them—he
is an epicure, A sluggard who is selfish, will only work half a day, when
he ought, to keep his family in decent circumstances, t© labour a whole
one—him we shun as lazy. But the man who has ten children, when he
can only keep two, we pity, and subscribe for, and regard as unfortunate.
�Large or Small Families ?
1
But where is the difference? Why should one passion or desire have
more immunity than the others?
Some opponents of the practice of limiting the population, urge that the
future state of society should be considered, and profess to dread the pros
pect of the world being without inhabitants. I confess that this consider
ation does not disturb me. In fact, I do not consider it incumbent upon
me to provide for a “ possible ” future. I am interested in the improve
ment of the present state of society, and I feel perfectly assured the future
populations of this globe will be more likely to know how to regulate
their own affairs than we are. The present generation being anxious to
control the future, is like a miser wishing to dispose of his wealth even
after his death. The great difficulty in politics is how to get rid of the
laws and restrictions bequeathed to us by our ancestors, who were no
doubt very solicitous that people in after ages should be “ well governed,”
forgetting that every new generation has fresh ideas and fresh require
ments.
I never heard but one argument, from a national point of view, against
limiting the population, which struck me as possessing any force, and it is
this. It is said, and said justly, that the thoughtful people who are
capable of self-control, are the best citizens; and if they reduce their own
numbers, by limiting their families, they are virtually abandoning society
to the vicious and improvident classes—the swarms who generate and
overspread the land like some of the prolific lower animals. This is a
little startling to the man who is desirous, not only of improving present
society, but that which is to follow. But hitherto the competition between
the two classes has not been very encouraging, for while “ every day a
wise man dies, every minute a fool is bom.” Of course it will be urged,
why seek to lessen the chances of the inferior classes being counter-balanced
by the superior? I think the prudence inculcated by the system of early
marriages and small families will not have that effect, for it is not exclu
sively from the lower, or even the lowest class that all criminals spring.
The younger sons and daughters of middle and upper class parents, having
the notions of “gentility ” without the means, frequently have recourse to
questionable practices to keep up “appearances.”
This question, viewed physiologically, to the student of human nature
is a most interesting one. Our present system of haphazard marriages
is productive of a great deterioration of the human race. Unions
are daily contracted between people who ought never to come to
gether, and if the evil could be limited to the contracting parties,
it would be of inestimable advantage to society. There are also others
who are attracted to each other by the strongest feelings of love,
and to prevent their marriage would be a real hardship; but for such
people to become parents is a crime. Robert Owen was a firm believer in
the influence of circumstances in the formation of character, and advocated
the surrounding of every individual at birth with superior associations, in
order to develop the good, and suppress the evil, tendencies of their natures.
This is sound and rational. But a vast amount of disease and vice would
oe prevented if the “ education ” commenced earlier—namely, if parents
Were only to have children when they themselves were perfectly healthy,
and when their means would allow of their properly nurturing and educat
ing all their offspring alike. The late Pierrepont Greaves was a strong
advocate of this system of regenerating the world, and was somewhat op
posed to Robert Owen’s doctrine of circumstances. Robert Owen’s cele
brated saying was this—“ Man’s character is formed for him and not by
�8
Large or Small Families ?
him." Mr. Greaves formulated his thesis thus—" As being is before
knowing, so education can never remedy the defects ef birth." There is a
world of truth in both sayings, and if Greaves were acted upon first,
and Robert Owen afterwards, a few generations hence would be the
heritors of sound bodies and sound minds; and the enormous sums now
spent in doctors to cure diseases which need never exist, in parsons who
flourish out of the superstition engendered by ignorance, and the policemen
and jailors who are employed to punish the vice and crime arising from
defective organisations and immoral training—might be devoted to schools
where real knowledge would be taught, and in the purchase of necessaries'
for domestic happiness, without which no family is free to develop to the
full its mental and moral attributes.
There is no possibility of gainsaying the fact, that this country is overpopulated, that at our usual rate of increase it must always remain so, and
not only not improve, but gradually grow worse. There is only one of two
ways of relieving the over-stocked labour market, and that is by death or
emigration, and either one is a calamity from which we all instinctively
shrink. I have not considered the state of any other country than Eng
land, and I have not directed my remarks to any other, whether continen
tal or American. The social problem at home presses for solution, and in
adducing this as a remedy for much of the evil which threatens to over
whelm us, 1 do not pretend that it is free from objection, but I do submit
that it is worthy of serious consideration.
In this tract I have endeavoured to show, that persons of a ** philoso
phical ’’ turn of mind may marry early and avoid the evils of delay; may
cultivate the domestic affections at a moderate cost of health and anxiety;
may conserve the charms which yield the keenest joy in wedded life; may
ensure to their offspring sound bodies and sound minds; may train those
minds to the fullest extent and under the happiest circumstances; may keep
their children around them and get them well placed; may control their
own fate and maintain their independence; and if my conclusions be sound,
there can be little doubt on which side lies the balance of comfort.
[Those who are not acquainted with the practical remedies, will find all
necessary information in the little tract “ Poverty: its Cause and Cure,”
price one penny. J
PRICE ONE PENNY.
London: Printed and Published by Austin & Co., 17, Johnson’s Court,
Fleet Street, E.C.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Large or small families? On which side lies the balance of comfort?
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Holyoake, Austin
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: [London]
Collation: 8 p. ; 18 cm.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
[Austin & Co.]
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[n.d.]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
G4952
Subject
The topic of the resource
Birth control
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Large or small families? On which side lies the balance of comfort?), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
Marriage
Population Increase
Poverty
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/8c970b3e63f9b9aa8ee91dcfa82e22d3.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=RPYSqEdMG67H6SHaAs2iMnSrBLTyTpT7QL728YZfe1YYHDU-gBwQXjsXQ8nxNpF8p7Kjd3M6bItaPyA06jctTaEpZhX0GFs5kJRadTYM7YHNH2JXef%7E9bGN5fGTASlGOlJxP5JPDuqwVyIL0RjzS-%7EUlKIJGOTrVw7Dx3IB8jyWKREBoiSGEsNxxTDqwQP0ISdEtR0hC4fPPw4hZcjAS0kFZYJFLaeZpBN6E8AtP3qq3RA3JL4nI45m7rO-e4pm6xd7yy5x0ZM6e4scRWBGSmt0i%7EHJt8wWMOGbQYg10mBIM99a00FrNoMV-ArmKK4nnvrKvgnLp7YvkIhDpPvrFQw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
250beca2e90f7ca76dc5caf277169ae0
PDF Text
Text
6.-2.S + 7
M -"S 0
NATIONAL SECULAR SOCIETY
Social Control of the Birth-rate
and
Endowment of Mothers.
BY
G. A. GASKELL.
“ The population question is the real riddle of the Sphinx, to which no politica
CEdipus has as yet found the answer. In view of the ravages of the terrible
monster, over-multiplication, all other riddles sink into insignificance.”—
Professor Huxley, “Nineteenth Century," J-an., 1890.
LONDON:
FREETHOUGHT
63
PUBLISHING
FLEET
STREET,
1890.
PRICE
COMPANY,
E.C.
TWOPENCE.
�LONDON :
PRINTED BY A. BONNER,
34 BOUVERIE STREET, FLEET STREET, E.C.
�Social Control of the Birth-rate and
Endowment of Mothers.
Dr. William Ogle, an experienced statistician and
official of the Registrar-General’s office, read a paper
before the Statistical Society on March 18th, 1890.
In it he says : “ the population of England and Wales
is, as we all know, growing in a most formidable
manner; and though persons may differ in their
estimates of the time when that growth will have
reached its permissible limits, no one can doubt that, if
the present rate of increase be maintained the date of
that event cannot possibly be very remote.”
On the subject of emigration as a remedy, Dr. Ogle
states: “the facilities for successful emigration are
yearly diminishing, and the time must inevitably come
—sooner or later—when this means of reducing our
population will altogether fail us.” What is needed,
and what we must come to eventually, is an equal
isation of the birth-rate and death-rate, producing
a stationary state of population. “ This equalisation”,
he says, “ can clearly only be effected either by increase
of mortality or by diminution of the birth-rate ; and as
no one will advocate the former, the problem of problems
which even now is vexing the souls of those who can
�( 4 )
look beyond the immediate future is how the birth-rate
is to be reduced.”
Fresh light is thrown by Dr. Ogle on the subject of
conditions affecting the marriage-rate in England and
Wales. He conclusively proves the usual opinion of
economists — that the marriage-rate varies inversely
with the price of wheat—to be erroneous. No such
relation exists, indeed the opposite is more nearly the
case. “ The marriage-rate varies not inversely, but
directly, with the price of wheat.” Tables are given to
show the facts of this relation for the years between
1820 and 1888. It is not an invariable rule, but usually
when the price of wheat is high, the marriage-rate is
high ; when wheat is low, marriages are fewer in number*
Now exceptions indicate that other important causes
exist to affect the marriage-rate and Dr. Ogle asks if
changes in the cost of food will not explain the fluctua
tions in the marriage-rate, what better explanation can
we find ? He carefully examines the tables of annual
variations in British exports and there he discovers a
certain ruling relation with fewer exceptions. He says :
“ The marriage-rate goes up and down synchronously
with the value of exports. This can clearly only be
because the changes in these values are an indirect
indication of corresponding changes in the employment
and the wages of the labouring classes; and it would be
desirable to obtain if possible some more direct measure
of these latter changes. Hunting about for such a
measure, I lighted, in the labour statistics of the Board
of Trade, upon the annual returns made by certain
trade unions in which were given for a series of years
the number of members on the books at the end of each
year, and also the average monthly number of such
�( 5 )
members who were in receipt of benefit as being out of
employ.” Dr. Ogle finds that a very close relation
exists between the number of unemployed in these trade
unions and the marriage-rate, which shows conclusively
that the marriage-rate fluctuations follow the fluctua
tions in the amount of industrial employment. Respect
ing “ the apparent paradox of increased marriages with
dearer food, and diminished marriages with cheaper
food ” he offers this explanation : “ Men marry, as we
have seen, in greater numbers when trade is brisk and
when the value of exports increases, but when the
exports increase so also do freights, and this rise in
freights causes a corresponding rise in wheat, the largest
part of our wheat being imported from abroad.”
He then goes on to adduce arguments which show
that for some time past there has been a slight retarda
tion of marriage in consequence of “ the ever-increasing
standard of comfort among all classes which makes men
and women unwilling to burden themselves with a
family until they are assured of a much higher income
than they would in former days have held to be suffi
cient.”
Again, in considering marriage-rate variations in the
different English counties, it appears that wherever
young women easily earn money in industrial occupa
tions, there marriages are earlier and also more
numerous.
The age at which marriage takes place is next under
consideration, and this is “a subject of scarcely less
importance than the rate in its bearing upon the growth
of the population.” Dr. Ogle finds here that the lowest
average age at marriage for both bachelors and spinsters
viz : 25-6 and 24-2 respectively, was in 1873, the year in
�( 6 )
which the marriage-rate was highest; and from that
date to the present time the ages have gone up gradually
but progressively in harmony with the general decline
in the marriage-rate.
In 1888 the average age of bachelors at marriage was
26'3 years and of spinsters was 24-7.
The reduction for spinsters has therefore only been
about six months for the whole period of fifteen years.
Now it is the ages of women at marriage which are all
important in regard to increase of population. “ There
is no reason to believe that a man who marries at thirty
will have a smaller family than a man who marries at
twenty as long as the wives are of one and the same
age.” Dr. Ogle refers to the work of Dr. Duncan on
“Fecundity, Fertility, and Sterility” and concludes
that “ the average duration of fertile marriage life for
women within child-bearing ages is, with the present
ages at marriage, 7-53 years, and that if all these women
delayed their marriages for five years the average dura
tion of fertility would be reduced to 5-53 years or by
26-6 per cent. He allows for the illegitimate birth-rate,
and finally reaches this summary : 11 in the very improb
able event of all women retarding their marriages for
five years, we should have a birth-rate of 23-3 per 1,000
doubtlessly a very great diminution of the present rate,
but still far too small a diminution to produce anything
like an equalisation of births and deaths.”
Dr. Ogle has no hope of such an increase of celibacy
among women as would effect the desired result in
combination with a five years’ retardation of marriage,
and he concludes his paper thus : “ It is manifest that
if the growth of population is hereafter to be arrested,
and a stationary condition produced, either by emigra-
�( 7 )
tion, or by increase of permanent celibacy, or by
retardation of marriage, these remedies will have to be
applied on a scale so enormously in excess of any
experience, as to amount to a social revolution.”
We are now in a position to realise the gravity of the
population question and to form some conception of the
great self-control that would be necessary throughout
the nation in order to effectually reduce the ominously
high birth-rate. A social revolution is indeed required,
though Dr. Ogle gives no hint as to the nature of it.
The vast section of degraded populace at the base of
our society renders hopeless any thought of this
necessary self-control arising among the mass of the
people under actual social conditions. Mr. G. Bernard
Shaw has admirably put the case in words addressed to
the propertied and employing classes. “ Your slaves ,
he says, 11 are beyond caring for your cries (of over
population), they breed like rabbits; and their poverty
breeds filth, ugliness, dishonesty, disease, obscenity,
drunkenness, and murder. In the midst of the riches
which their labour piles up for you, their misery rises
up too and stifles you. You withdraw in disgust to the
other end of the town from them ; you appoint special
carriages upon your railways and special seats in your
churches and theatres for them; you set your life apart
from theirs by every class barrier you can devise; and
yet they swarm about you still; your face gets stamped
with your habitual loathing and suspicion of them ....
they poison your life as remorselessly as you have
sacrificed theirs heartlessly.”1
Under an industrial system requiring the existence of
1 “ Fabian Essays in Socialism ”, page 21.
�( 8 )
the two classes—propertied employers and dependent
employed, there is no possibility of an effective redudtion
of the birth-rate. The warning of Malthus has been
prominently before all thoughtful persons for nearly a
century, nevertheless, to the mass of the people, it re
mains unknown or unheeded. Moreover an intimate
knowledge of the working class gives conviction that
the vast majority will put no curb on their procreative
power out of regard to the welfare of society, and very
little out of regard to their own future domestic comfort.
I am personally acquainted with working men who not
only agree to the principle of Malthus, but know also
the easy neo-Malthusian restraints; yet the families of
these men have quickly increased to the number of six
or more children. Obviously so long as the wage-earn
ing system seems always to give a chance for each
individual to be employed, and a promise to parents
that any number of children may also be remunera
tively employed, there is literally no force bearing upon
ordinary humanity to induce it to prudential limitation
of offspring by celibacy or any other means whatever.
You may point to France for some evidence to the
contrary ; and I do not deny that certain conditions—
such as peasant proprietorship—lead to some degree of
parental prudence; but France offers nothing towards
a complete solution of the great question. The degree
of prudence there practised does not accomplish the
desired end. The wage-workers of France are in as
miserable a condition as the same class in this and
other civilised countries. We may rest assured that
whatever be the degree of reduction of the birth-rate
arrived at under the present economic system, it will
fall far short of the reduction necessary for the pre-
�( 9 )
vention of the pressure on available subsistence. It
represents merely a recoil from that pressure already
existing and privately felt.
If we ask what it is that prevents the average majority
from adopting restraints that are necessary to the well
being of the entire nation, we must remember that at
present the moral relation between society and its indi
vidual members is a pious opinion rather than a tangible
unmistakeable faffi. To the non-criminal the solidarity
of society and his relation to the whole are principally,
almost solely, felt through the payment of rates and
taxes and by his exercise of the political and municipal
votes. Society is to the worker, from his industrial
position, scarcely existent. It recognises no duty to
cherish its members and help them to an honourable and
sufficient livelihood. Its posture is that of neutrality,
of absolute indifference. It leaves them to sink or swim
as fortune or ability may determine, and in this irre
sponsible attitude it has no demand for and no right to
claim reponsibility on the part of its members towards
itself. But the absence of this relation is disastrous in
the sphere of domestic and parental life. The having
or not having a family is looked on as purely a personal
matter. The State offers no assistance and imposes no
restraints. The cares of a family devolve on parents
alone, and all considerations of prudence begin and end
with the individuals directly concerned. It follows in
natural course that the ordinary man resents the inter
ference with his liberty of having as many children as
he pleases. If he feels any restraints to parentage,
these lie within himself and his immediate circle. The
gain or loss following from prudence or imprudence
falls upon himself; consequently his choice is ample
�( IO )
justification of his conduit, whatever that may be.
Prudent men may limit their families, but these are
not the majority; and so long as the imprudent populate
recklessly, it does not promote the welfare of general
society that the prudent should diminish the rate of
increase of their superior stock. Legislative restrictions
would be of no avail under present social conditions.
As long as each man fights for his own hand and
against his fellows in the struggle for existence, so long
will each feel himself free from responsibility to that
society which disclaims all important duties to him, and
whose attitude is always threatening and unsympa
thetic.
Premising that enough has been said to make clear
the fact that no effective reduction of the birth-rate
will take place in society as at present constituted, I
pass on to indicate the nature of the evolution neces
sary to accomplish that end. The evolution must be
primarily one of industrial and family conditions.
First, the State or Community must become respon
sible for the welfare of each of its adult members in so
far as to provide opportunities of work for all and
equalised remuneration to all. Second, the State must
endow legitimate motherhood and take upon itself the
expense1 of the rearing and educating of children, thus
bringing parents into direct relation with the State and
causing them to become responsible to it in the matter
of procreation.
This revolution could not be other than gradual,
whether the time were long or short. When completed
the whole aspect of the case in relation to restriction of
the birth-rate is altered. The entire community will
1 This does not imply interference with family life. Individuals
would be free to retain the isolated home or form groups in unitary
homes, precisely as they wished.
�have brought home to it the knowledge of the amount
of available food resources for all, since the State1 is
compelled to keep exact account of supplies in view of
its responsibility for the remuneration of universal
labour. But with food forthcoming useful work is
limitless, and every able worker is a source of wealth
to the community.
Poverty, however, is not the only cause of degrada
tion ; another fruitful source is sex-inequality, and that
must be rendered socially innocuous. State supported
motherhood is essential to the emancipation of women
from dependence on individual men. In the bearing of
a child a woman suffers more or less incapacity for
work during eleven months or one year. If the Com
munity does not support her at that period she falls
into the hands of a man for sustenance, or depends on
her diminished powers for earning a living. In either
case she bears a penalty for maternity beyond its
natural pains and obligations. On the other hand,
there goes with paternity no natural penalty; therefore,
clearly, to bring about social equality between the sexes
society must make up to the woman her social maternal
loss. Evolutionists are agreed in tracing the subjection
of woman to her reproductive disabilities; it follows
that her subjection can only be put an end to by those
reproductive disabilities being counterbalanced by the
State. That this logical outcome is the inevitable end
of the modern 11 woman movement ” must, I think,
become more and more evident to thoughtful minds
aware of the principal social tendencies of the age.
I need say nothing here in reference to the exact
form of communal support of mothers and children.
1 It is convenient to use the terms “ State” and “ Community ”,
but no opinion is expressed about the amount of centralisation
necessary for organisation of labour.
�( 12 )
It suffices to establish the principle of social equality,
which must originate and guide the coming revolution.
. Dr. Ogle’s paper powerfully forces upon an unpreju
diced mind the existence of a vital relation between
child-birth and the State. In “ Scientific Meliorism ”x
also the author points to this vital relation. “ The
marriage union”, she says, “is essentially a private
matter, with which society has no call and no right to
interfere. Child-birth, on the contrary, is a public
event. It touches the interests of the whole nation.”
Nor is the production of new members of a com
munity important only in respect of quantity, but .also
in respect of quality. Weak constitutions are a burden
to society ; inferior types are less useful than strong,
healthy, superior types.
No sooner does the State begin to exercise control
over parentage than maternity becomes a social as well
as an individual function. But true social relations
imply reciprocal duties, and prominently before the
public mind there stand out the duties of prospective
mothers to society and the duties of society to all
mothers who rightly fulfil the healthful conditions of
maternity. Legitimate motherhood is invested with
attributes of public respect, and moral forces obtain in
the momentous, vital sphere of reproduction.
I have said it is legitimate motherhood that must be
State supported ; by legitimate I mean marked by con
ditions of well-being and sanctioned beforehand by the
community. Illegitimate—that is ill-conditioned mater
nity—will carry the penalty of unassisted parental
support, for individuals who fail in their duties to the
1 “ Scientific Meliorism.” J. H. Clapperton. Page 320. See
also to the same effect, “ The Law of Population : its Meaning and
its Menace
A lecture, by J. M. Robertson. Published by R.
Forder, 28 Stonecutter Street, E.C. Price twopence.
�( i3 )
community are rightly considered to forfeit the help of
the community. This negative penalty would assuredly
act as a powerful deterrent in the direction required;
moreover it could not involve the difficulties of applica
tion attaching to any direct penalties under the present
system.
What is impossible in an unorganised,
degraded society, becomes easy when all members of a
community are educated, well-housed, and well-cared
for, and where communal protection of the individual
demands, and has to be met by, a strict regard on the
part of individuals to communal well-being. We must
glance now shortly at the difficulties of transition.
I have said that the social revolution will be gradual.
A sudden abolition of poverty and establishment of ease
of life would eventuate in what ? The death-rate would
quickly be lessened, the birth-rate vastly accelerated.
Young people would marry more heedlessly than they
do now. Artificial checks to conception would be
ordinarily neglected and the general result would inevit
ably prove a letting out of the flood-gates of increase.
Later the reappearance of general poverty followed by
famine, pestilence, and appalling mortality would
culminate in reduction of population to the limits of
available subsistence. But that this irrational round of
social license, disaster, suffering, death, will be played
out in a scientific age is inconceivable.
Let us look at the social forces resting upon human
intelligence, supported by the scientific knowledge and
material wealth of the age, on which we may depend
for the counteracting and overcoming of the danger.
Already we have a widespread educated opinion in
favour of the necessity for a diminished birth-rate,
which, being a true opinion will increase year by year
and be powerful during the coming revolution. We
have also, what never existed before, a scientific
�( 14 )
knowledge of natural laws, of social conditions, and of
Humanity’s powers and limitations, with a philosophic
conception of the varied relations that interpenetrate
and control the whole. The accelerated birth-rate will
be foreseen and steps taken to meet its requirements
by increased production of food. It is well-known that
by better cultivation of the land the produce of this
country may be easily doubled. This then will be done,
and time gained for the generation which is degraded
by present evil social conditions to die out. Meanwhile,
education for the new generation will be generously,
lavishly, provided. The momentous issues of education
are no longer ignored. It is seen that to spend on our
Board Schools four times the amount we now do, to
give free breakfasts and dinners to the children, no
matter at what cost, is a policy incalculably beneficial
in the long run. The essential points to be gained are
that the young should revolt from surroundings that
degrade and should be morally and intellectually
quickened to such impressions as will render them
social and useful as members of a society rapidly
advancing to better and happier conditions of life.
In the earlier stages of transition, state support of
motherhood can only be broached, not enacted. When
enacted it cannot be general, because it would only
apply to authorised parentage. But all prospective
parents would seek for similar advantages if possible,
unauthorised maternity would be discountenanced, and
an intelligent adoption of checks preventive of conception
would become universal. From this must follow in
natural sequence the steady reduction of illegitimate
parentage, and the birth-rate.
In this connection, too, let it be remembered that
women, free from men’s domination and able to earn
their living as readily and easily as men, will assuredly
�( i5 )
refuse to be constantly bearing children, to the injury
of their health and the crippling of their lives by ex
cessive gestation and nursing. Parentage is mainly a
woman’s question.
The community would thus gradually obtain control
over the production of its own all-important social
material, without which control it is simply impossible
to get rid of the evils of over-population and racial
deterioration.
How the individualist who abjures the organisation
of society implied by Socialism can have any reasonable
hope of the painless equalisation of the birth-rate and
death-rate I am at a loss to conceive. Effective Social
ism will but establish conditions rendering possible that
thorough moral control over the individual which is
necessary in order to curb his liberty of evil aCtion. In
an improved society we seek socialised freedom—less
liberty for bad conduct, more liberty for good conduit
and harmless personal action. This is the ideal of
Socialism on its ethical side.
Now so far I have taken the measures proposed for
restriction of population to include the neo-Malthusian
method, viz., artificial checks to conception. It cannot
be denied that these checks must make limitation of
births much easier for the majority of people. I have
shown the futility of the application of even these
checks in our present degraded and unorganised society.
How much more futile, then, is the suggestion of ultra
moralists who enjoin sexual abstinence both within and
without marriage! It is difficult to understand their
conception of the strength of average human passion.
They appear to think it so weak that the widespread
illicit intercourse of the sexes and sexual crime must be
to their minds without any adequate motive. Such a
misconception of human nature renders valueless the
�(
)
opinions on social reform set forth by these moralists.
Professor Geddes and Mr. J. A. Thomson have lately
published a generally excellent treatise on “ The Evolution
of Sex ”, In it, however, at page 297, this passage occurs:
“We would urge, in fadt, the necessity of an ethical
rather than of a mechanical prudence after marriage,
of a temperance recognised to be as binding on husband
and wife as chastity on the unmarried.” What is
meant by the temperance here recommended ? Surely
it is well-known that the birth of a large family is quite
consistent with an extremely sparing and temperate
exercise of the procreative function. Temperance has
no bearing here. As to consistent celibacy and its
counterpart within marriage, these states do not imply
“temperance” but total abstinence which is a wholly
different matter. But this appeal to people generally
for total» abstinence from a natural function during all
but a very short period of adult life can be regarded
only as an ill-considered attempt to mould humanity to
an arbitrary pattern of morality which either disregards
the essentials of human nature or stigmatises an
inalienable function as in some degree unworthy and
personally injurious.
We live in an age of artificial methods both in the
matter of wresting from nature our sustenance and much
that conduces to such comfort as we enjoy, and in the
matter of protecting ourselves from the evils that nature
may bring upon us. It is true that self-control is
necessary to restriction of the birth-rate but this does
not involve an intolerable repression of one of the
strongest and most social impulses of our nature.
Artificial method has already come to our help, and in
this scientific age we are not likely to refuse that help,
on the contrary, we are sure to use artificial method
and make it as effective as possible.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Social control of the birth-rate and endowment of mothers
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Gaskell, G.A.
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 16 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: Includes bibliographical references. Printed by A. Bonner, Fleet Street. Part of the NSS pamphlet collection.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Freethought Publishing Company
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1890
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
N280
Subject
The topic of the resource
Birth control
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (Social control of the birth-rate and endowment of mothers), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Birth Control
Motherhood-England
NSS
Population Increase