SYSTEMATIC COLONIZATION.
SOME months ago, as our readers may remember, we had the pleasure of submitting to the public, a plan of Systematic Colo- nization, which a Society, styling itself National, attempted subse- quently to recommend to the favourable notice of Government. Of that association, Mr. WILMOT HORTON and Colonel TORRENS were, originally, members; but the principles of the plan appear- ing to these gentlemen, after some consideration, questionable, they withdrew their names from the list of its supporters,—while the other members, though to all appearance unconvinced by the objections which had teen directed against it, somewhat unac- countably dissolved tht Society. Mr. C. Titaruarrr, M.P., has oucemore brought the subject pralaineattly ,forward- by a letter addressed to Sir GEORGE MURRAY, late Secretary for the Colonies. That production is now before us. It contains, among other mat- ters, a full exposition of the points of difference between Colonel TORRENS and the Society. We shall briefly recapitulate some of the principles on which the plan in question professes to rest. In this country, labourers may be assumed to exist in excess, when viewed in relation to the amount of capital—of the funds destined to set their industry in motion ; or, as others hold, when viewed in relation to the land, which may be cultivated without an extreme depression of the rate of profit. In several of our Colo- nies, again, land naturally fertile, remains unproductive, from a want of labourers. To transfer our surplus population to these Colonies, will, however, prove but of temporary advantage, unless. the extent of the land to be taken into cultivation be limited. The great majority of human beings will at all times rather choose to. become landowners, than to sell their services as labourers. There is, therefore, a strong tendency, on the part of colonists, to spread themselves over the surface of a fertile country. But dispersion leads to barbarism ; it is opposed to a division of labour ; it pre- vents the proper cultivation of the land. These consequences can be obviated only by the Government selling to the colonists all the land which they may require. Such a course, besides preventing the dispersion of the cultivators, will yield a fund for defraying the expenses attendant on the emigration of labourers from the mother country. If, moreover, the emigrants should consist of young couples, the progress of population, if too rapid in this country, might be retarded ; and the demand for labour in the Colonies be eactually supplied. Colonel TORRENS has urged several objections to the soundness of the principles of which we have furnished this meagre abstract. To sell the land, he alleges, would be, to force the cultivation of inferior land, whilst superior land remained uncultivated—would have the effect, in short, of lowering the rate of profit. To this argument, the Society has replied, that by superior land, we may not always understand land of the first quality— because the vicinity of markets and manure, plenty of labour, and good roads, frequently invests poor soils with a higher capacity of yielding profitable returns to capital, than lands naturally more fertile possess. Still, however, Colonel TORRENS'S vieA are ad- mitted to be " under present circumstances" just ; but it is their object, the Society declare, " to create other circumstances" in the Colonies—to confer upon large tracts of inferior land, the advan- tages we have enumerated, while they " guarantee and enforce a most beneficial compact between all the inhabitants." We incline to think, that in their argument the Society have conceded a great deal too much to Colonel ToImaNs. When it is alleged,, as an objection to the scheme, that Government, by demanding a price for all the land in the Colonies, forees.the ap- plication of capital to inferior soils already, nder cultivation, and lowers the rate of profit, it should be recollected, that the ques- tion, in so far as our Colonies are concerned, is not :simply be. tween a higher or a lower rate of profit ; but between. selling the land, or permitting the colonists to lose themselves over its sur- face—between a rate of profit lower than at some previous_period, on the one hand, or a deprivation of the means of accumulating capital, on the other—between concentration, in short, or dis- persion. A diminution in the rate of profit is to he deprecated, no doubt ; but permit the colonists to throw away the benefits which flow from division of labour, and the increase of capital will be arrested altogether. Is not, however, the assumption on which Colonel TORRENS'S argument rests, altogether unwarranted ? Is it possible that the rate of profit should fall materially, when capi- talists have it in their power to raise it, by investing stock in the purchase of fertile land? Whenever profits should fall, fresh tracts would be enclosed. It never was con- template* to fix a high price upon the unreclaimed portions of the soil—never, indeed, a higher than should suffice to check the tendency to dispersion, so fatal to new countries. A ,fall of profits, therefore, such as Colonel TORRENS has supposed— of 201. per cent.—is not for a moment to be admitted as being within the range of possibilities. The other objections which Colonel TORRENS has advanced, have been, we think, satisfactorily disposed of by the Society. Want of space prevents us from enlarging on them ; but we may hereafter return to the subject.
Previous page
