【Notes and Communications】
‘As One of the Swinish Multitude’:＊ A Note on Malthus’s Allusion to Burke’s Reflections
Nobuhiko Nakazawa
I
In my previous article on Thomas Robert Malthus’s（ 1766-1834） political views during his early years（ Nakazawa 2012）, I demonstrated that he was an earnest sympathizer of Charles James Fox and his opposition Whig party, as well as a harsh critic of William Pitt’s administration, and discussed how this shaped his first Essay on the Principle of Population （1798）. At the same time, though his first Essay is widely known as a counter-revolutionary work, similar in some ways to Edmund Burke’s（ 1729/30-97） Reflections on the Revolution in France（ 1790）, I suggested the not insignificant ideological gap that existed between the two great thinkers. In my earlier paper, however, I refrained from exploring the details of that gap primarily because I was concerned that the clarity of my article would be compromised by further exposition. Through this small note, I aim to undertake a part of my work I chose to sideline in the previous article. Further, the problem that we are now facing arises because less direct reference regarding Burke or any of his writings has been noticed in Malthus’s officially published texts. As far as I can determine, the best point to overlap is that An Account of the European Settlements in America（ 1757）, which was co-authored by Burke and his cousin William Burke, was favoura- bly mentioned in the second and subsequent editions of the Essay （1803, 1806, 1807, 1817 and 1826） alongside other historical writings such as Abbé Raynal’s Histoire des deux Indes（ 1770） and William Robertson’s History of America（ 1777）. In other words, Malthus never explicitly mentioned Burke’s
＊ I am grateful to many who commented on drafts of this paper or provided other indis- pensable help, particularly Shin Kubo, Seiichiro Ito, Miriam Bankovsky, Fabio Petri and Tony Aspromourgos. I would also like to thank the journal editors and reviewers for their useful comments and suggestions. However, any errors and omissions are my re- sponsibility alone. This research was supported in part by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Num- ber 18K01536. Notes and Communications 79
post-revolutionary writings, such as Reflections, although whether this was intentional is unclear. Alongside the influence of a series of separate but similar attacks by Marx on both Burke and Malthus （Marx ［1867-1894］ 1976-1981, I, 766-77, 925-26）, lack of specific reference to Burke’s post- revolutionary output by Malthus has contributed to the two writers being view- ed as equally ideological reactionary conservatives, denouncing the democratic upsurge associated with the French Revolution and the impoverished masses （Himmelfarb 1984, 66-73, 100-32; McNally 2000, 435-36; Mizuta 1969; Okochi 1951, 116, 149-50）.
II
On this point, for example, Robert Mayhew, the author of the latest authorita- tive biography of Malthus, remarked that ‘Burke attracted notoriety in his own age and ever since for only one comment he made about population in the Reflections, the reference to the common people of France as “a swinish mul- titude”’（ Mayhew 2014, 46-47） and that ‘Malthus’s comments on “Nature’s mighty feast” were equivalent in their infamy to Burke’s “swinish multitude”’ （Mayhew 2014, 125）. In Reflections, Burke indeed referred to the starving French masses as the ‘swinish multitude’ when he warned readers of the perils of allowing the lower classes to gain political power. He thus wrote the following.
Nothing is more certain, than that our manners, our civilisation, and all the good things which are connected with manners, and with civilisation, have, in this European world of ours, depended for ages upon two prin- ciples; and were indeed the result of both combined; I mean the spirit of a gentleman, and the spirit of religion. The nobility and the clergy, the one by profession, the other by patronage, kept learning in existence, even in the midst of arms and confusions, and whilst governments were rather in their causes than formed. Learning paid back what it received to nobility and to priesthood; and paid it with usury, by enlarging their ideas, and by furnishing their minds. Happy if they had all continued to know their indissoluble union, and their proper place! Happy if learning, not debauched by ambition, had been satisfied to continue the instructor, and not aspired to be the master! Along with its natural protectors and guardians, learning will be cast into the mire, and trodden down under the hoofs of a swinish multitude. （ Burke［ 1790］ 1989, 129-30）
As an indicator of the established prejudice entertained by the upper class 80 経済学史研究 62 巻 1 号（The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 62, No. 1）
against the lower orders, the phrase ‘swinish multitude’ soon became short- hand for any political philosophy defending and perpetuating a rigid social hierarchy. Interestingly, the phrase was consequently re-appropriated by many of his contemporary popular radicals, including Thomas Spence, an English pamphleteer known as a pioneer of socialist land-nationalization, and William Drennan, one of the founding members of the United Irishmen.1 Spence called his weekly periodical Pig’s Meat; or Lessons for the Swinish Multitude （1793-95）, precisely to parody Burke’s derogatory opinion of the lower orders-those who were neither of the nobility nor of the clergy and desired equity in areas such as education. In Ireland, Drennan was delighted to em- ploy this contemptuous phrase in that manner in a 1795 pamphlet, while the rebel army which marched to the Battle of Antrim against the British army on 7 June 1798 struck up a song, ‘The Swinish Multitude’（ Herzog 1998, ch. 12; Im 2018; McNally 2000, 435; Newman 2013, 139-40; Smyth 2010, 9-10; Thompson 1968, 98; Thuente 1998, 23-24）. In the second edition of Essay（ 1803）, in contrast, Malthus spoke of ‘nature’s mighty feast’ to stress his principled rejection of the poor’s right to subsistence. He thereby wrote the following.
A man who is born into a world already possessed, if he cannot get subsistence from his parents on whom he has a just demand, and if the society do［ sic］ not want his labour, has no claim of right to the small- est portion of food, and, in fact, has no business to be where he is. At nature’s mighty feast there is no vacant cover for him. She tells him to be gone, and will quickly execute her own orders, if he does not work upon the compassion of some of her guests. If these guests get up and make room for him, other intruders immediately appear demanding the same favour. The report of a provision for all that come, fills the hall with numerous claimants. The order and harmony of the feast is disturbed, the plenty that before reigned is changed into scarcity; and the happiness of the guests is destroyed by the spectacle of misery and dependence in every part of the hall, and by the clamorous importunity of those, who are justly enraged at not finding the provision which they had been taught to expect. The guests learn too late their error, in coun- teracting those strict orders to all intruders, issued by the great mistress of the feast, who, wishing that all her guests should have plenty, and knowing that she could not provide for unlimited numbers, humanely
1 A radical nationalist group founded in 1791 in Ireland with the objective to reform Parliament and, if necessary, separate from Britain. Notes and Communications 81
refused to admit fresh comers when her table was already full. （Malthus［ 1803-1826］ 1989, II, 127-28; italics in original）
A less widely known Robert Southey’s （1774-1843）, who was a romantic poet, vitriolic review of Malthus’s second Essay, found in the Annual Review of 1803（ but published in 1804）, has contributed decisively to the image of Malthus as a backward and reactionary person （Nakazawa and Ou 2019）. Southey’s review was, however, sharply contrasting to Malthus portrait as a moderate reformer in 1798 （discussed in more detail later）. According to Southey, the Essay is ‘the political bible of the rich, the selfish and the sensual’ （Southey［ 1804］ 1994, 129） and its author ‘calls for no sacrifice from the rich; on the contrary, he proposes to relieve them from their parish rates: he recommends nothing to them but that they should harden their hearts. . . . He writes advice to the poor for the rich to read’（ Southey［ 1804］ 1994, 135- 36）. Southey considered that the folly and wickedness of this book was typi- cally represented in the ‘nature’s mighty feast’ metaphor-the entire paragraph of which he quoted in his review to show that this metaphor sanctioned those social evils he wished to eradicate. Southey’s hostile, but influential, review earned Malthus a level of notoriety that has persisted, although the referenced paragraph appeared only in the 1803 version of Essay and was deleted from 1806 onwards. Thus, as noted by Mayhew, Malthus was an unwilling recipient of the same stigma with which Burke had been marked.
III
Focusing on the phrase ‘swinish multitude,’ I hope to illustrate the sharp contrast between Burke’s and Malthus’s political terminology in the remainder of this note. Malthus’s library catalogue covers most of Burke’s major works, including Reflections, An Account of the European Settlements in America, Speech on American Taxation （1774）, Thoughts and Details on Scarcity （1795; posthumously published in 1800） and A Letter to a Noble Lord （1796）（ Jesus College, ed. 1983, 24-25）. Moreover, it is highly probable that Malthus had read Burke’s Reflections（ or at least had had an inkling of its contents） by the summer of 1795. As evidence, Malthus’s previously unknown diary of his tour of the Lake District, which is recently made available, can be called upon. The following quotation is part of the diary dated 5 July 1795.
Was recommended by my friend the man midwife to the Duke of Cumberland, whose first born was a remarkably pretty girl about sixteen. 82 経済学史研究 62 巻 1 号（The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 62, No. 1）
She mistook me for a fine gentleman at first & came up to wait upon me, but upon my asking her some question about the market place by way of introducing myself, & upon finding when the lights came that I had no powder, she deserted me as one of the swinish multitude. （Pullen and Parry, eds. 1997-2004, II, 29）
At this instance, neither Burke nor his Reflections are explicitly referenced, but it is particularly eye-catching that in the last part of this quotation Malthus refers to himself with self-mockery as one of the ‘swinish multitude,’ rather than as a fine gentleman. While almost certainly writing this diary with Burke’s Reflections in mind, Malthus inconspicuously re-appropriated this infamous phrase in the same way that popular radical writers contemporary to him had done. Further, Malthus was doubtlessly familiar with the radical appropriation of Burke’s terminology; this appropriation was being fairly widely practised at that time. At the same time, it should also be noted that young Malthus lived within a network of prominent radical intellectuals and that he would later write a pamphlet entitled The Crisis （1796）, a political critique of Pitt’s repressive policies, which he planned but failed to publish in the year after writing this diary in 1795（ Nakazawa 2012, 17-22）. In the 1780s, during his learning years, he attended the dissenting Warrington Academy and was tutored by the Unitarian Gilbert Wakefield2 before entering Jesus College, Cambridge, where he was tutored by another Unitarian, William Frend. Joseph Johnson, the publisher of the first Essay, was a patron of prominent radical intellectuals, such as Thomas Paine, William Godwin, Joseph Priestly and Mary Wollstonecraft（ Ando 2003, 13-14, 46-51; Braithwaite 2003, 165, 171, 178; Tyson 1979, 146, 193-94）. The historical facts aforementioned thus infer that Johnson published the first Essay, as it was considered a book that propagated modern reformists’ thinking-a radical camp that criticised the curtailment of civil liberties under Pitt’s regime.
2 As is widely known, Malthus’s first Essay was the outcome of gentlemanly intellectual debates between his father, Daniel, and him on the topic of perfectibility of man and society-a subject on which they disagreed. Daniel supported Godwin’s and Condorcet’s optimistic views, but also encouraged Malthus’s publication of opposing views, which suggests that Malthus had grown up in a progressive household. Although hoping that Malthus would pursue a career in the established Church of England, Daniel was an admirer of and personally acquainted with Rousseau and a strong believer in the optimistic ideas of the Enlightenment. We can see Daniel’s liberal educational philosophy（ presumably influenced by Rousseau’s Émile） in his choice to send Malthus to the dissenting academy at Warrington. Notes and Communications 83
However, it cannot be concluded that Malthus was much more sympathetic to pro-French radicals than to anti-French conservatives. Notably, in his first Essay, which appeared three years after the ‘as one of the swinish multitude’ diary had been written, he openly expressed disgust for the masses inspired by Godwin’s and Condorcet’s utopian arguments in the years follow- ing the French Revolution:
In a similar manner, the forcing manure used to bring about the French Revolution, and to give a greater freedom and energy to the human mind, has burst the calyx of humanity, the restraining bond of all society; and, however large the separate petals have grown, however strongly, or even beautifully, a few of them have been marked, the whole is at present a loose, deformed, disjointed mass, without union, symme- try, or harmony of colouring. （Malthus［ 1798］ 1986, 97）
Interestingly, unlike Burke, Malthus compared the masses to plants rather than animals, such as swine; however, this citation does not suggest that Malthus included himself ‘as one of the swinish multitude,’ but it rather suggests the opposite. Then how can Malthus’s twofold viewpoints of the lower orders, aforementioned in the two separate early writings, be interpreted as expressing a consistent viewpoint? As already elaborated in Winch（ 1987） and Nakazawa （2012）, Malthus was a moderate reformer of a scientific and non-antagonistic manner. The first Essay certainly included critical insights into the French Revolution, but it is rash to interpret it as a characteristically reactionary work filled with prejudice towards mankind for its contemporary readers. Such an interpretation would overlook the diversity（ or comprehensiveness） of radical thinkers in late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century Britain.3
3 In the Oxford English Dictionary, the word ‘radical’ as used in the context of politics is defined in the following ways: advocating thorough or far-reaching political or social reform; representing or supporting an extreme section of a party. However, this word stems from the Latin word for root, and thus, in politics, it is originally associated with attempts to tackle the root of social problems and suggest solutions, but in no way with extremism. It can be understood from this that in the British political context ‘radical’ generally refers to a comprehensive concept of how to critically analyse existing practice and the establishment-whose content changes over time-, rather than just positions that are perceived to be extreme. The late eighteenth and early nineteenth century was a time of explosive growth in the number and variety of British radical thinkers. Some of them, like Spence, went so far as to insist wide and even redistribution of property, but others only called for parliamentary reform with varying degrees from moderate or gradual to extreme or drastic. For one of the authoritative studies on a wide （continued） 84 経済学史研究 62 巻 1 号（The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 62, No. 1）
The contemporary radical camp favourably included a moderate reformer such as Malthus, which is why it is unsurprising that Malthus’s first Essay had the same publisher as works by Thomas Paine and other pro-French radical writers. In fact, an anonymous review of the first Essay, in Analytical Review in 1798, earned him a reputation as a moderate reformer: ‘He ［Malthus］ is not one of those unfeeling enemies of mankind, who ridicule all ideas of the melioration of the condition of man. He thinks the condition of mankind may be improved, and that an improvement of it ought to be attempted’（ Anon.［ 1798］ 1994, 2）. The favourable image of him conveyed through this review was regrettably distorted by Southey’s vitriolic review a few years later into something like an enemy of the lower orders. Hence, it is reasonable to think that, as a moderate reformer or a ‘scientific Foxite Whig’ （Nakazawa 2012, 24）, Malthus was not attached to any peculiar group of social classes and that his twofold viewpoints of the lower orders are a typical representation of a specific intellectual and political attitude.
IV
In conclusion, my final suggestion to those interested in acquiring a more historically accurate understanding of the development of Malthus’s thought is that they consider the significance of the young Malthus’s allusion to Burke’s Reflections and pay attention to Southey’s role as an originator of the erroneously applied image of Malthus as a Burkeanised figure. （Nobuhiko Nakazawa: Faculty of Economics, Kansai University）
References Ando, K. 2003. Igirisu Romanha to Furansu Kakumei（ British Romantics and the French Revolution）. Tokyo: Kirihara Shoten.［ In Japanese］ Anon. ［1798］ 1994. Review of Malthus’s Essay on the Principle of Population. In Population: Contemporary Responses to Thomas Malthus, ed. by A. Pyle. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 1-9. Braithwaite, H. 2003. Romanticism, Publishing and Dissent: Joseph Johnson and the Cause of Liberty. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Burke, E. ［1790］ 1989. Reflections on the Revolution in France. In The Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke, ed. by P. Langford et al. Oxford: Oxford University Press, vol. 8:53-293.
and diverse range of the British radical thinkers in this period, see Dickinson（ 1977, chs. 6-8）. See also Goto（ 2011, 45-46）. Note that, however, in sharp contrast to the present paper, Dickinson（ 1977, 311-12） attributes Malthus to the conservative camp together with Burke, not the radical camp. Notes and Communications 85
Dickinson, H. T. 1977. Liberty and Property: Political Ideology in Eighteenth-Century Britain. New York: Holmes and Meier Publishers. Goto, H. 2011. Political Economy in Late Eighteenth-Century British Radicalism: A Re-Examination of the Analytical Categories. Kyoto Economic Review 80（ 1）: 41-69. Herzog, D. 1998. Poisoning the Minds of the Lower Orders. Princeton: Princeton University Press. Himmelfarb, G. 1984. The Idea of Poverty: England in the Early Industrial Age. London: Faber and Faber. Im, B. 2018. Reconsidering ‘a Swinish Multitude:’ John Aitken’s Poem, The Swinish Multitude’s Push for Reform: A Poem in Three Cantos（ 1816）. Studies in English Language & Literature 44（ 2）: 187-203. Jesus College, ed. 1983. The Malthus Library Catalogue: The Personal Collection of Thomas Robert Malthus at Jesus College, Cambridge. New York: Pergamon Press. McNally, D. 2000. Political Economy to the Fore: Burke, Malthus and the Whig Response to Popular Radicalism in the Age of the French Revolution. History of Political Thought 21（ 3）: 427-47. Malthus, T. R.［ 1798］ 1986. An Essay on the Principle of Population. In The Works of Thomas Robert Malthus, ed. by E. A. Wrigley and D. Souden. London: Pickering, vol. 1. -.［ 1803-1826］ 1989. An Essay on the Principle of Population, Variorum edition, ed. by P. James. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Marx, K.［ 1867-1894］ 1976-1981. Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, trans. by B. Fowkes. 3 vols. Harmondsworth, Middlesex and New York: Penguin Books. Mayhew, R. J. 2014. Malthus: The Life and Legacies of an Untimely Prophet. Cambridge, MA and London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Mizuta, H. 1969. Igirisu Hoshu Shugi no Igi（ The Meaning of British Conservatism）. In Sekai no Meicho 34: Baku Marusasu（ Great Books of the World 34: Burke, Malthus）, ed. by H. Mizuta. Tokyo: Chuo Koron Sha, 5-48.［ In Japanese］ Nakazawa, N. 2012. Malthus’s Political Views in 1798: A ‘Foxite’ Whig? History of Economics Review 56:14-28. Nakazawa, N. and A. Ou. 2019. Sauji no Marusasu Hihan: ‘Hinmin no Teki’ Marusasu Zou no Kiten wo Saguru（ Southey’s Attack on Malthus: When and Why Was Malthus Labelled as ‘an Enemy of the Poor’?） Annual Bulletin of the Malthus Society 28:127- 41.［ In Japanese］ Newman, I. 2013. Edmund Burke in the Tavern. European Romantic Review 24（ 2）: 125- 48. Okochi, K. 1951. Shakai Shisoshi （History of Social Thought）. Tokyo: Yuhikaku. ［In Japanese］ Pullen, J. and T. H. Parry, eds. 1997-2004. T. R. Malthus: The Unpublished Papers in the Collection of Kanto Gakuen University. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Smyth, J. 2010. The Men of Property: Politics and the Languages of Class in the 1790s. In Politics, Society and the Middle Class in Modern Ireland, ed. by F. Lane. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 7-20. Southey, R.［ 1804］ 1994. Review of Malthus’s Essay on the Principle of Population. In Population: Contemporary Responses to Thomas Malthus, ed. by A. Pyle. Bristol: Thoemmes Press, 116-37. Thompson, E. P. 1968. The Making of the English Working Class, rev. ed. London: Victor Gollancz. 86 経済学史研究 62 巻 1 号（The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 62, No. 1）
Thuente, M. H. 1998. William Sampson: United Irish Satirist and Songwriter. Eighteenth-Century Life 22（ 3）: 19-30. Tyson, G. P. 1979. Joseph Johnson: A Liberal Publisher. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press. Winch, D. 1987. Malthus（ Past Masters）. Oxford: Oxford University Press.