MISCELLANIES. MANSFIELD'S PARAGUAY, BRAZIL, AND THE HE' over-population' theory, so popular at the beginning of this century, has been fast falling into disrepute. That startling dogma of the science du néant which used of old so magisterially to inform the human race that it was on the whole a failure, because "the number of human beings had always a tendency to increase faster than the means of subsistence,' is now becoming, not merely questionable, but ludicrous. Started, so wicked wags affirm, by a few old bachelors, who, having no children themselves, bore a grudge against their 'recklessly-multiplying' neighbours for having any-it was suspected from the first on moral grounds; and may be now considered as fairly abolished on scientific ones. The moral philosopher answered to it that it was impossible that the universe could be one grand mistake: human nature a disease; and the Creator of mankind one who- -but reverence forbids us to say what we should have a right to say of Him, were that theory a true one. The student of humanity asked, 'Is it possible that the family life, which is the * FRASER'S MAGAZINE, November, 1856.—' Paraguay, Brazil, and the Plate.' Letters written in 1852-3. By C. B. Mansfield, Esq., M.A., of Clare Hall, Cambridge; with a Sketch of the Author's Life, by the Rev. C. Kingsley. Cambridge: Macmillan and Co. 1856. VOL. II. B appointed method of educating the highest and holiest feelings of man, should be at the same time the normal cause of his final poverty and starvation? Leave such inhuman dreams to monks and faquirs.' The scientific agriculturist doubted the truth of the dogma more and more as his science revealed to him that the limit of productiveness, even upon old soils, had been nowhere reached. The sanitary reformer put in as a demurrer the important fact, that under proper arrangements that limit could never be reached; for as each human being (so he asserted) returned to the soil the whole elements of the food which he consumed, saving those which already existed in boundless abundance in the atmosphere, the productiveness of the soil ought to increase in exact ratio to the number of human beings concentrated on it. From these broad facts, the advocates of the science du néant took refuge in arguments about the cost of production. More skilful farming, more complete sewage, might certainly enable the land to support greater numbers; but not to do so profitably. The increased expense of the processes would interfere with the general rapid production of wealth. Here perhaps they had, on the whole, the best of the argument; and if it were any pleasure to them to prove the impotency of humanity, they must have enjoyed that lofty gratification awhile. One would have thought, certainly, that the business of the philosopher who desired the good of his fellow-creatures, was rather to show them what they could do, than what they could not; to preach progress, rather than the stationary state, and hope, rather than despair; to bend his mind, like a practical man, to the ascertaining by experiment what could be done towards increasing the sustenance of the peoples, instead of sending forth from his remote study, idola specûs, abstract maxims which only strengthened the dogged laziness which refused to till the land, and the dogged ignorance which refused either to use or let others use the refuse of the towns, though it was poisoning hundreds yearly by epidemics. But the science du néant took little account of such plain matters; after all, why help to support more human beings, when it had settled long ago that there were too many already? Why even stop epidemics, which might be only nature's wholesome method of ridding herself of that plethora of rational beings-Children of God,'-as some still called them with which she was periodically embarrassed. So the agriculturist and the sanitary reformer had to fight on, and on the whole, conquer, with little or no help from that science which arrogated to itself the knowledge of the laws of wealth. Meanwhile stood by, laughing bitterly enough, the really practical men,-such men as the author of the book now before us: the travellers, the geographers, the experimental men of science, who took the trouble, before deciding on what could be, to find out what was ; and, as it were, took stock' of the earth and her capabilities, before dogmatizing on the future fate of her inhabitants. And, 'What?' they asked in blank astonishment, 'what, in the name of maps and common sense, means this loud squabble? What right has any one to dogmatize on the future of humanity, while the far greater part of the globe is yet unredeemed from the wild beast and the wild hunter? If scientific agriculture be too costly, is there not room enough on the earth for as much unscientific and cheap tillage as would support many times over her present population ? What matters it, save as a question of temporary makeshift, whether England can be made to give thirty-three bushels of wheat per acre instead of thirty-one, by some questionably-remunerative outlay of capital, while the Texan squatter, without any capital save his own two hands, is growing eighty bushels an acre? Your disquisitions about the margin of productiveness' are interesting, curious, probably correct; valuable in old countries but nowhere else. For is the question, whether men shall live, or even be born at all, to be settled by them, forsooth, while the valley of the Ottawa can grow corn enough to supply all England; the valley of the Mississippi for all Europe; while Australia is a forest, instead of being, as it will be one day, the vineyard of the world: while New Zealand and the Falklands are still waste; and Polynesia, which may become the Greece of the New World, is worse than waste; while the Nebraska alone is capable of supporting a population equal to France and Spain together; while, in the Old World, Asia Minor, once the garden of old Rome, lies a desert in the foul and lazy hands of the Ottoman; while the Tropics produce almost spontaneously a hundred valuable articles of food, all but overlooked as yet in the exclusive cultivation of cotton and sugar;-and finally (asks Mr. Mansfield in his book), while South America alone contains a territory of some eight hundred miles square, at least equalling Egypt in climate, and surpassing England in fertility; easy of access; provided, by means of its great rivers, with unrivalled natural means of communication, with water power enough to turn all the mills in the world;' and needing nothing but men to make it one of the gardens of the world? With his mind full of such a hope for the future of humanity, and full, too, of scientific knowledge which gave him especial fitness for estimating the capabilities of a foreign country, Mr. Mansfield went out upon a tour, the only fruit of which is the present book. He did not live either to form the book into shape, |