477

ticians who seem ashamed of Christianity ; and, as a politician, 1know not that Mr. Malthus can be completely answered.

“ With the greatest respect, I am your most obedient servant ,

« * * *.

“ I take the liberty of adding my direction.” .

I immediately returned the following answer, having no dispo-sition to enter into a controversy with Mr. Malthus , and thinkingit impossible that there should be either justices or rich mensuch as are described in the letter.

“ Rev. Sir, Calgarth Park, Dec. 19. 1807.

“ Your apprehensions that mischief may arise to religion andmorals from the circulation of Mr. Malthus ’s book, (which I neverread,) are probably well founded, and your anxiety that a properanswer should be given to it is certainly creditable to yourself,and highly becoming your function. That you think so well ofme as to wish for my animadversions on this book, I consider asa valuable compliment to myself, to which I sincerely wish I hadbetter pretensions.

“ Though I have not read this book, I have looked into it:but perceiving that the author was endeavouring to show theutility of bringing down the population of the earth to the levelof the subsistence l’equisite for the support of man, (a propositionwanting no proof, since where there is no food man must die,)I thought his time and talents would have been better employedin the investigation of the means of increasing the subsistenceto the level of the population ; and I laid the book aside.

V