Think As Historian: THINK AS A HISTORIAN: EXPLAIN THE HISTORICAL SITUATION Of A SOURCE
Knowing the historical situation of a source—including the other contemporaneous opinions swirling about a topic—helps situate the source in a spectrum of viewpoints.
In 1844, Samuel Laing, a British politician, wrote a paper called “The Causes of, and Remedies for, the Existing Distress of the Country,” in reaction to evidence “that as wealth increases, poverty increases in a faster ratio.” He proposed systematic, government sponsored emigration as one solution to the problem.
Read the excerpts below from Laing’s paper and then answer the questions that follow to help explain its historical situation.
“The truth appears to be, that while emigration is advocated simply
as a matter of profit and loss, and regarded as a cheap and convenient
mode of shoving misery out of sight, it is not calculated to answer
the selfish ends of its promoters. But if it were taken up in a spirit of
charity, and as part and parcel of a comprehensive scheme for raising
the condition of the poorer classes, and prosecuted by the government
and society from a sense of duty rather than of self-interest, there seems
every ground for hoping that emigration might become an instrument
of great good, not only to the colonies, but to the mother country. If
the owners of estates, for instance, where the agricultural population
is clearly redundant, were, with a disinterested view to the good of
their dependants, to assist them in emigrating, and if the government
was, under proper guarantees, and with proper discrimination, to
cooperate in the enterprise, there seems no doubt that much practical
good might be accomplished. Colonies . . . might be planted in the
North American settlements with every prospect of success; indeed
with the certainty that those who, if they had remained at home,
would have been squalid paupers, will, in a few years, become a
body of respectable freeholders, and an important acquisition to their
adopted country. By the same process the condition of those at home
might be greatly ameliorated, provided active steps were taken by
the landlord to eradicate the evils which had led to the multiplication
of a pauper population. A great writer has said, “Do the duty that
lies nearest to thee, and already, in so doing, thy next duty will have
become clearer.” . . . Every step taken in advance with a good motive
and in a right direction, clears away a thousand difficulties. When it
is clearly seen that a measure will benefit human beings, and injure
nothing but abstract theories, let the government strike boldly in, and
the theories will soon veer round and prove that what has been done
is right. . . . Do not let the government risk the certain good that
is effected under the present system by any hazardous experiment
unsanctioned by experience; but, on the other hand, do not let them
sink spellbound under the influence of theories of laissez faire, and
omit opportunities of doing practical good where it is in their power.
Let them leave the principle of self-interest to do all the good it can,
but remember that it can never be a substitute for the higher principles
of duty and charity, and that emigration, like any other expedient for
the relief of society, must be conducted in a disinterested spirit of
enlightened benevolence, in order to accomplish its object.”
Source: https://archive.org/details/
nationaldistress00lainuoft/page/n4
1. In what context does Laing use the term “self-interest”?
2. What does his use of that term suggest about the opinions of those who would disagree with his plan? How would they argue against his plan?
3. To what does Laing refer when he writes that the plan will “injure nothing but abstract theories”?
4. How would Laing respond to the idea that the “invisible hand” will do a better job than his proposal in addressing problems of poverty?