Charles Knowlton - Fruits of Philosophy: A Treatise on the Population Question

The pamphlet which we now present to the public is one which has beenlately prosecuted under Lord Campbell's Act, and which we republish,in order to test the right of publication. It was originally writtenby Charles Knowlton, M. D., whose degree entitles him to be heard withrespect on a medical question. It was first published in England, aboutforty years ago, by James Watson, the gallant radical, who came toLondon and took up Richard Carlile's work, when Carlile was in jail. Hesold it, unchallenged, for many years, approved it, and recommended it.It was printed and published by Messrs. Holyoake & Co., and found itsplace, with other works of a similar character, in their "FreethoughtDirectory," of 1853, and was thus identified with freethought literatureat the then leading freethought depot Mr. Austin Holyoake, workingin con-junction with Mr. Bradlaugh at the National Reformer office,Johnson's Court, printed and published it in his turn, and thiswell-known freethought advocate, in his "Large or Small Families,"selected this pamphlet, together with R. D. Owen's "Moral Physiology"and the "Elements of Social Science," for special recommendation. Mr.Charles Watts, succeeding to Mr. Austin Holyoake's business, continuedthe sale, and, when Mr. Watson died, in 1875, he bought the plates ofthe work (with others) from Mrs. Watson, and continued to advertise andto sell it until December 23, 1876. For the last forty years thebook has thus been identified with freethought, advertised by leadingfreethinkers, published under the sanction of their names, and sold inthe headquarters of freethought literature. If, during this long period,the party has thuswithout one word of protestcirculated an indecentwork, the less we talk about freethought morality the better; thework has been largely sold, and, if leading freethinkers have solditprofiting by the salethrough mere carelessness, few words could bestrong enough to brand the indifference which thus scattered obscenitybroadcast over the land. The pamphlet has been withdrawn fromcirculation in consequence of the prosecution instituted against Mr.Charles Watts, but the question of its legality or illegality has notbeen tried; a plea of "Guilty" was put in by the publisher, and thebook, therefore, was not examined, nor was any judgment passed upon it;no jury registered a verdict, and the judge stated that he had not readthe work.

We republish this pamphlet, honestly believing that on all questionsaffecting the happiness of the people, whether they be theological,political or social, fullest right of free discussion ought to bemaintained at all hazards. We do not personally indorse all thatDr. Knowles says: his "Philosophical Proem" seems to us full ofphilosophical mistakes, andas we are neither of us doctorswe are notprepared to indorse his medical views; but since progress can only bemade through discussion, and no discussion is possible where differingopinions are suppressed, we claim the right to publish all opinions, sothat the public, enabled to see all sides of a question, may have thematerials for forming a sound judgment.

The alterations made are very slight, the book was badly printed, anderrors of spelling and a few clumsy grammatical expressions have beencorrected; the subtitle has been changed, and in one case four lineshave been omitted, because they are repeated word for word further on.We have, however, made some additions to the pamphlet, which are in allcases kept distinct from the original text. Physiology has made greatstrides during the past forty years, and not considering it right tocirculate erroneous physiology, we submitted the pamphlet to a doctorin whose accurate knowledge we have the fullest confidence, and who iswidely known in all parts of the world as the author of the "Elements ofSocial Science;" the notes signed "G. B." are written by this gentleman.References to other works are given in foot-notes for the assistance ofthe reader, if he desires to study up the subject further.

Old Radicals will remember that Richard Carlile published a workentitled "Every Woman's Book," which deals with the same subject andadvocates the same object as Dr. Knowlton's pamphlet R. D. Owen objectedto the "style and tone" of Carlile's "Every Woman's Book," as not beingin "good taste," and he wrote his "Moral Physiology" to do in Americawhat Carlile's work was intended to do in England. This work ofCarlile's was stigmatized as "indecent" and "immoral," because itadvocated, as does Dr. Knowlton's, the use of preventive checks topopulation. In striving to carry on Carlile's work, we cannot expect toescape Carlile's reproach; but, whether applauded or condemned, we meanto carry it on, socially as well as politically and theologically.

We believe, with the Rev. Mr. Malthus, that population has a tendency toincrease faster than the means of existence, and that some checks musttherefore exercise control over population. The checks now exercised aresemi-starvation and preventable disease; the enormous mortality amongthe infants of the poor is one of the checks which now keep down thepopulation. The checks that ought to control population are scientific,and it is these which we advocate. We think it more moral to prevent theconception of children than, after they are born, to murder them by wantof food, air and clothing. We advocate scientific checks to population,because, so long as poor men have large families, pauperism is anecessity, and from pauperism grow crime and disease. The wages whichwould support the parents and two or three children in comfort anddecency, is utterly insufficient to maintain a family of twelve orfourteen, and we consider it a crime to bring into the world humanbeings doomed to misery or to premature death. It is not only thehard-working classes which are concerned in this question. The poorpreacher, the struggling man of business, the young professional man,are often made wretched for life by their inordinately large families,and their years are passed in one long battle to live; meanwhile, thewoman's health is sacrificed and her life embittered from the samecause. To all of these we point the way of relief and happiness; forthe sake of these we publish what others fear to issue; and we do itconfident that if we fail the first time, we shall succeed at last,and that the English public will not permit the authorities to stifle adiscussion of the most important social question which can influence anation's welfare.

Charles Bradlaugh.

Annie Besant.

Consciousness is not a "principle" or substance of any kind, nor isit, strictly speaking, a property of any substance or being. It is apeculiar action of the nervous system, and the system is said to besensible, or to possess the property of sensibility, because thosesentient actions which constitute our different consciousnesses may beexcited in it. The nervous system includes not only the brain and spinalmarrow, but numerous soft white cords, called nerves, which extendfrom the brain and spinal marrow to every part of the body in which asensation can be excited.