The various express warranties we have mentioned are those usually inserted in a policy of marine insurance; but many others may be made, to which we have not alluded. These, however, will be governed by the rules before laid down, in reference to the warranties already pointed out and considered; and in framing the instrument, the assured must be extremely careful to understand and appreciate the extent and legal effect of every condition which the policy contains.

ART. IV.-POLITICAL ECONOMY.

John Hopkins' Notions on Political Economy. By the author of "Conversations on Chemistry," "Political Economy," etc.

THE mere title of a book on Political Economy is calculated to suggest grave considerations: it is the sign of an important change in the social as well as the literary world—a change in the feelings and habits of thought pervading every rank of civilized society. It may be that many engaged in the active employments of life have not paid much attention to the silent revolution in which they are unconscious actors; as persons floated down by the current scarcely observe the river's motion, unless their attention is engaged by some attractive object on the banks. The list of writers who have devoted their leisure and their talents to this important subject is sufficiently remarkable to arrest notice, for it shows that questions connected with the constitution and interests of society, have engaged the attention which was once devoted to the graces of literature and the refinements of science. When some of our most distinguished senators address pamphlets on political science to their constituents when Lord Brougham, in England, superintends "The Working Man's Companion," and ladies write tales to illustrate Political Economy-when the questions of Poor Laws, Free Trade, and SubTreasury Schemes are discussed more eagerly in our colleges than the metrical canons of Porson, or the grammatical niceties of Anthon—when in every private society, from the hut to the mansion, we find the nature and probable results of laws to be enacted or repealed, discussed energetically, if not wisely, we cannot doubt that a bold spirit of inquiry is abroad, whose workings must not, and indeed, cannot be neglected.

The main question discussed in all the works on political economy, that have been issued from the press within the last twenty years, is, the best means of ameliorating the condition of the laboring population; consequently, all these writers-on other topics far as the poles asunder -agree that there is something of which the working class may justly complain. But what is that something? We shall not be very wide of the truth, we think, in answering, that while wealth has increased in certain quarters, poverty has not been proportionately diminished in others. It is, perhaps, a fallacy either to assert or deny that the poverty of one class has increased with the wealth of the other, because poverty and wealth are sometimes used in a positive and sometimes in a relative sense. Taking comforts and necessaries as the measure of povertyas a greater share of these can be obtained by labor now, than could a

century ago-it might be said that the poor are at this moment in better circumstances than they were; but, taking the amount of distance between the poor and the rich as our measure, there exists, unquestionably, more relative poverty now than at any former period. It seems to us, however, that the extreme schools of political economists have founded their systems too exclusively on one or other of these views: whereas, for any good result, both should be taken into consideration. The complaint then might, perhaps, be stated thus: For a certain period, the wealth of this country has been increasing, but that wealth has been hitherto disproportionately distributed; now, as wealth is but an accumulation of profits, this disproportion proves that a class has been unjustly deprived of its fair share of profits, and must continue to be so, until a more equitable mode of distribution is adopted. This would be a just ground of complaint-view the question how we may-for it is no argument to tell a man that he is well off, when he has a right to be still better. If asked whence arises this unequal distribution of wealth, it might be answered—from the system of commercial laws which regulate the distribution; but that system is composed of parts so numerous and varied, that it is no easy matter to discover the peccant member, and when found, it is questionable whether it can now be removed without injury to a sound part. This is the greatest difficulty that the practical statesman has to encounter, and it is that for which least allowance is made by the generality of mankind. Abstract principles are often insisted upon too rigidly, and sufficient allowance is not made for the operation of circumstances. How much better would it be, if those who have written or spoken on the subject, had always made it their object to impress on the laboring class the duty and advantage of using the means of improvement already in their hands, and to teach rulers that the best encouragement to industry is to show the industrious how to avail themselves of their own resources, instead of looking to the government for aid, as if acts of Congress were charms, and proclamations spell-words, that could control the laws of nature.

We are not disposed, however, to enter at any great length on this much agitated question, on which most persons have now made up their minds, and that too, the more determinately, because they have very generally done so without consulting the evidence. But we cannot refrain from expressing our opinion, that another and a greater matter than that between the advocates and opponents of any particular set of principles, remains behind, namely, an examination of the necessity which is supposed to entail pauperism on society. That casual poverty could be prevented, even in the best constituted state, is assuredly an Utopian dream; but such poverty is not difficult to deal with, and may be met either by voluntary or compulsory charity, as may seem best to the lawgiver. The poverty to which we allude, is that wholesale pestilence, which is now considered as a natural grade in society, and which makes perpetual calls on the legislator and the magistrate to satisfy its ceaseless cravings.

Of this poverty, we have a strong conviction, that in a really civilized community, in which substantial justice was administered to all classes of the people, it would not exist. We believe it to be the immediate consequence of undue privileges, of undue obstacles to the free circulation and natural reward of labor, the most sacred of all properties. In

England, for instance, the entire course of the legislature has tended to manufacture paupers, and to squeeze out of the pale of the national industry an increasing portion of the most helpless of the laboring population. The great scope of the English statute law, (and not to go to remoter sources,) has been to favor accumulation, to promote monopoly, and to place manual labor in dependence on capital. Judging from experience, it appears to us that Providence has imbued the species with so strong a disposition to labor in order to overcome the difficulties with which nature has surrounded our means of subsistence, that it requires a very strong pressure to depress and beggar the many; and the history of modern commerce is one entire illustration of this truth.

Another evil tending to the multiplication of pauperism, is the unequal pressure of indirect taxation, which falling on articles of primary consumption, weighs the more heavily, in proportion to the narrowness of the individual's income. But the greatest cause of mischief, is the utter indifference long shown by the state to the moral education of the people; and we would refer, in proof, to the large proportion of the laboring population, who, whether they have or have not received doctrinal instruction, are utterly ignorant of the very elements of prudential wisdom, and are left at the mercy of their passions and appetites, to waste or misapply their resources, and to sink into wretchedness, pauperism, and perhaps criminality.

The following passages, which occur in a beautiful discourse delivered by Dr. Channing, at Boston, in the year 1835, on the Anniversary of the Benevolent Fraternity of Churches, will bring home the subject to the heart of the reader, far more certainly than we could hope to do.

"It is the boast of our country, that the civil and political rights of every human being are secured;—that impartial law watches alike over rich and poor. But man has other, and more important, than civil rights; and this is especially true of the poor. To him who owns nothing, what avails it, that he lives in a country where property is inviolable; or what mighty boon is it to him, that every citizen is eligible to office, when his condition is an insuperable bar to promotion? To the poor, as to all men, moral rights are most important; the right to be regarded according to their nature-to be regarded, not as animals or material instruments, but as men; the right to be esteemed and honored, according to their fidelity to the moral law; and their right to whatever aids their fellow beings can offer for their moral improvement, for the growth of their highest power. These rights are founded on the supremacy of the moral nature, and until they are recognized, the poor are deeply wronged.

"Our whole connection with the poor should tend to awaken in them a consciousness of their moral powers and responsibilities, and to raise them in spirit and hope above their lot. They should be aided to know themselves, by the estimate we form of them. They should be rescued from self-contempt, by seeing others impressed with the great purpose of their being. We may call the poor unfortunate, but never call them low. If faithful to their right, they stand among the high. They have no superiors, but in those who follow a brighter, purer light; and to withhold from them respect, is to defraud their virtue of a support, which is among the most sacred rights of man. Are they morally fallen and lost?

They should still learn, in our unaffected concern, the worth of the fallen soul, and learn that nothing seems to us so fearful as its degradation. This moral, spiritual interest in the poor, we should express and make effectual by approaching them-by establishing an intercourse with them, as far as consists with other duties. The strength, happiness, and true civilization of a community are determined by nothing more, than by this fraternal union among all conditions of men. For the sake of the rich as well as poor, there should be a mutual interest binding them together; there should be but one caste, that of humanity."

If there be one principle of political economy more firmly established or more important than another, it is that which has been called the principle of population. Scarcely a year passes in which the operation of that principle is not manifested in the sufferings of some one or more of the classes into which our laborers are divided—sufferings which have their immediate cause, indeed, in some casual revulsion of trade, but which are aggravated and prolonged by the habitual poverty existing among all the laboring classes, and which, it has been proved to satiety, is the consequence of the disproportion between the numbers to be employed and the means of employing them. The law which regulates the proportion between the number of laborers and the means by which they may be employed-in other words, which regulates the permanent rate of wages -is called the principle of population. How important must be the consideration of the principle which regulates the rate of wages, both to those who pay and those who receive them, is sufficiently plain. It has, accordingly, attracted a greater share of public attention than many other important doctrines of the science of which it forms a part, and will continue to obtrude itself upon the consideration of all those who turn their minds to political reasoning, as long as peasants shall be subject to periodical sufferings.

The question being simply one of proportion- the proportion between the numbers of the people and the means of employing them-it is ne cessary to ascertain in the first place, the relative rates according to which the number of the people and the means of employment would increase, if no check were employed upon the increase of either. This rate has almost universally been called the tendency to increase· a phrase very clear and definite, but which has occasionally been applied in a novel and unaccustomed manner, without duly weighing the importance of adhering to an established phraseology; or, at all events, without adducing a sufficient reason for dissenting from it in any particular in

stance.

The means of employing laborers are food and the implements and materials of their trade; but food is the main object of consideration. It has been shown by distinguished political economists, and it is obvious without further proof, that additional labor employed in the cultivation of the land within a given district, produces generally a less proportionate return. The more labor bestowed upon the same soil, the greater is the total return, but the less is the return to every successive quantity of labor bestowed. The tendency of food to increase is therefore a constantly decreasing tendency.

Then what is the tendency to increase in the human race? This tendency has long since been determined by philosophic observation. It

has been ascertained that, for considerable periods, and in extensive districts under temperate climates, population has doubled every twentyfive years. The power of reproduction in the human race must, under similar climates, be always and every where the same.

Here, then, we have the means of determining the question at once. The tendency of population to increase is constantly the same; that of food is constantly diminishing. It is certain, therefore, when we consider the simplicity and shortness of the premises, unusually certain, that as the wages of labor depend upon the proportion between food and numbers, and as numbers can increase faster than food, that unless the number of laborers can be limited, the people must always be poor; and as surely as they are poor will they be miserable, vicious, and discontented. To enlighten the people upon the great law which regulates their condition, and which so materially concerns the safety of their superiors in wealth and station, is obviously the most benevolent work of private charity, and a chief duty of public governors.

The tendency of wealth and civilization to check the increase of numbers, by elevating the moral feelings of the people, and inducing them to submit to voluntary restraint rather than undergo the privations which spring from improvident marriages, is no where so ably or more eloquently expounded, than in the works of the late Professor Senior. "What," (asks this writer,) "is the picture presented by the earliest records of those nations which are now civilized? or, which is the same, what is now the state of savage nations? A state of habitual poverty and occasional famine. A scanty population, but still scantier means of support. Admitting, and it must be admitted, that in almost all countries the condition of the body of the people is poor and miserable, yet as poverty and misery were their original inheritance, what inference can we draw from the continuance of their misery as to the tendency of their numbers to increase more rapidly than their wealth? But if a single country can be found in which there is now less poverty than is universal in a savage state, it must be true, that under the circumstances in which that country has been placed, the means of subsistence have a greater tendency to increase than the population. Now this is the case in every civilized country. Even in Ireland, the country most likely to afford an instance of what Mr. Mill supposes to be the natural course of things, poor and populous as she is, suffers less from want with her eight millions of people, than when her only inhabitants were a few septs of hunters and fishers. In our early history, famines, and pestilences the consequences of famine, constantly recur. At present, though our numbers are trebled and quadrupled, they are unheard of. The United States of America afford the best ascertained instance of great and continued increase of numbers. They have afforded a field in which the powers of population have been allowed to exhaust their energy; but though exerted to the utmost, they have not equalled the progress of subsistence. Whole colonies of the first settlers perished from absolute want; their successors struggled long against hardship and privation, but every increase of their numbers seem to have been accompanied or preceded by increased means of support. If it be conceded that there exists in the human race a natural tendency to rise from barbarism to civilization, and that the means of subsistence are proportionally more abundant in a civilized