第12章

hedistinctlyaffirmsthatin

politicaleconomythereisnoroomforinductionatall，"theeconomiststartingwithaknowledgeofultimatecauses，"and

beingthus，"attheoutsetofhisenterprise，atthepositionwhichthephysicistonlyattainsafteragesoflaboriousresearch。"

Hedoesnot，indeed，seemtobeadvancedbeyondthepointofviewofSenior，whoprofessedtodeducealleconomictruth

fromfourelementarypropositions。WhilstMillinhisLogicrepresentsverificationasanessentialpartoftheproccssof

demonstrationofeconomiclaws，Cairnesholdsthat，asthey"arenotassertionsrespectingthecharacterorsequenceof

phenomena"（thoughwhatelsecanascientificlawbe？），"theycanneitherbeestablishednorrefutedbystatisticalor

documentaryevidence。"Apropositionwhichaffirmsnothingrespectingphenomenacannotbecontrolledbybeing

confrontedwithphenomena。Notwithstandingtheunquestionableabilityofhisbook，itappearstomark，insomerespects，a

retrogressioninmethodology，andcanforthefuturepossessonlyanhistoricalinterest。

Regardedinthatlight，thelaboursofMillandCairnesonthemethodofthescience，thoughintrinsicallyunsound，hadan

importantnegativeeffect。Theyletdowntheoldpoliticaleconomyfromitstraditionalposition，andreduceditsextravagant

pretensionsbytwomodificationsofcommonlyacceptedviews。First，whilstRicardohadneverdoubtedthatinallhis

reasoningshewasdealingwithhumanbeingsastheyactuallyexist，theyshowedthatthescience，asheconceivedit，mustbe

regardedasapurelyhypotheticone，Itsdeductionsarebasedonunreal，oratleastone—sided，assumptions，themost

essentialofwhichisthatoftheexistenceoftheso—called"economicman"，abeingwhoisinfluencedbytwomotivesonly，

thatofacquiringwealthandthatofavoidingexertion;andonlysofarasthepremisesframedonthisconceptioncorrespond

withfactcantheconclusionsbedependedoninpractice。Seniorinvainprotestedagainstsuchaviewofthescience，which，

ashesaw，compromiseditssocialefficacy，。whilstTorrens，whohadpreviouslycombatedthedoctrinesofRicardo，hailed

Mill’snewpresentationofpoliticaleconomyasenablinghim，whilstinonesenserejectingthosedoctrines，inanothersense

toacceptthem。Secondly，besideeconomicscience，ithadoftenbeensaid，standsaneconomicart，——theformerascertaining

truths。respectingthelawsofeconomicphenomena，thelatterprescribingtherightkindofeconomicaction;andmanyhad

assumedthat，theformerbeinggiven，thelatterisalsoinourpossession—that，infact，wehaveonlytoconverttheoremsinto

precepts，andtheworkisdone。ButMillandCairnesmadeitplainthatthisstatementcouldnotbeaccepted，thatactioncan

nomoreintheeconomicworldthaninanyotherprovinceoflifeberegulatedbyconsiderationsborrowedfromone

departmentofthingsonly;thateconomicscansuggestideaswhicharetobekeptinview，butthat，standingalone，itcannot

directconduct——anofficeforwhichawiderprospectofhumanaffairsisrequired。Thismatterisbestelucidatedbya

referencetoComte’sclassification，orratherhierarchicalarrangement，ofthesciences。Beginningwiththeleastcomplex，

mathematics，werisesuccessivelytoastronomy，physics，chemistry，thencetobiology，andfromitagaintosociology。Inthe

courseofthisascentwecomeuponallthegreatlawswhichregulatethephenomenaoftheinorganicworld，oforganised

beings，andofsociety。Afurtherstep，however，remainstobetaken—namely，tomorals，。andatthispointtheprovincesof

theoryandpracticetendtocoincide，becauseeveryelementofconducthastobeconsideredinrelationtothegeneralgood。

Inthefinalsynthesisallthepreviousanalyseshavetobeusedasinstrumental，inordertodeterminehoweveryrealquality

ofthingsormenmaybemadetoconvergetothewelfareofHumanity。

Cairnes’smostimportanteconomicpublicationwashislast，entitledSomeLeadingPrinciplesofPoliticalEconomynewly

Expounded，1874。Inthiswork，whichdoesnotprofesstobeacompletetreatiseonthescience，hecriticisesandemendsthe

statementswhichprecedingwritershadgivenofsomeofitsprincipaldoctrines，andtreatselaboratelyofthelimitationswith

whichtheyaretobeunderstood，andtheexceptionstothemwhichmaybeproducedbyspecialcircumstances。Whilst

markedbygreatability，itaffordsevidenceofwhathasbeenjustlyobservedasaweaknessinCairnes’smentalconstitution——his"deficiencyinintellectualsympathy，"andconsequentfrequentinabilitytoseemorethanonesideofatruth。

Thethreedivisionsofthebookrelaterespectivelyto（1）value，（2）labourandcapital，and（3）internationaltrade，Inthefirst

hebeginsbyelucidatingthemeaningoftheword"value，"andunderthisheadcontrovertstheviewofJevonsthatthe

exchangevalueofanythingdependsentirelyonitsutility，without，perhaps，distinctlyapprehendingwhatJevonsmeantby

thisproposition。Onsupplyanddemandheshows，asSayhaddonebefore，thatthese，regardedasaggregates，arenot

independent，butstrictlyconnectedandmutuallydependentphenomena—identical，indeed，underasystemofbarter，but

underamoneysystem，conceivableasdistinct，Supplyanddemandwithrespecttoparticularcommoditiesmustbe

understoodtomeansupplyanddemandatagivenprice;andthusweareintroducedtotheideasofmarketpriceandnormal

price（as，followingCherbuliez，hetermswhatSmithlesshappilycallednaturalprice）。Normalpriceagainleadstothe

considerationofcostofproduction，andhere，againstMillandothers，hedeniesthatprofitandwagesenterintocostof

production;inotherwords，heassertswhatSenior（whomhedoesnotname）hadsaidbeforehim，thoughhehadnot

consistentlycarriedoutthenomenclature，thatcostofproductionisthesumoflabourandabstinencenecessaryto

production，wagsandprofitsbeingtheremunerationofsacrificeandnotelementsofit。But，itmaywellbeasked，Howcan

anamountoflabourbeaddedtoanamountofabstinence？Mustnotwagesandprofitsbetakenas"measuresofcost"？By

adheringtotheconceptionof，"sacrifice"heexposestheemptinessoftheassertionthat"dearlabouristhegreatobstacleto

theextensionofBritishtrade"——asentenceinwhich"Britishtrade"meanscapitalists’profits。Atthispointweare

introducedtoadoctrinenowfirstelaborated，thoughthereareindicationsofitinMill，ofwhosetheoryofinternational

valuesitisinfactanextension。Inforeigntradecostofproduction，inCairnes’ssense，doesnotregulatevalues，becauseit

cannotperformthatfunctionexceptunderaregimeofeffectivecompetition，andbetweendifferentcountrieseffective

competitiondoesnotexist。But，Cairnesasks，towhatextentdoesitexistindomesticindustries？Sofarascapitalis

concerned，hethinkstheconditionissufficientlyfulfilledoverthewholefield——aposition，letitbesaidinpassing，whichhe

doesnotseemtomakeout，ifweconsiderthepracticalimmobilityofmostinvested，asdistinctfromdisposable，capital。But

inthecaseoflabourtherequisitecompetitiontakesplaceonlywithincertainsocial，orratherindustrial，strata。Theworldof

industrymaybedividedintoaseriesofsuperposedgroups，andthesegroupsarepractically:"non—competing，"the

disposablelabourinanyoneofthembeingrarelycapableofchoosingitsfieldinahigher。（57）Thelawthatcostofproduction

determinespricecannot，therefore，beabsolutelystatedrespectingdomesticanymorethanrespectinginternational

exchange，。asitfailsforthelatteruniversally，soitfailsfortheformerasbetweennon—competinggroups。Thelawthatholds

betweentheseissimilartothatgoverninginternationalvalues，whichmaybecalledtheequationofreciprocaldemand。Such

astateofrelativepriceswillestablishitselfamongsttheproductsofthesegroupsasshallenablethatportionoftheproducts

ofeachgroupwhichisappliedtothepurchaseoftheproductsofallothergroupstodischargeitsliabilitiestowardsthose

othergroups。Thereciprocaldemandofthegroupsdeterminesthe"averagerelativelevel"ofpriceswithineachgroup;

whilstcostofproductionregulatesthedistributionofpriceamongtheindividualproductsofeachgroupThistheoremis

perhapsofnogreatpracticalvalue;butthetendencyofthewholeinvestigationistoattenuatetheimportanceofcostof

productionasaregulatorofnormalprice，andsotoshowthatyetanotheroftheaccepteddoctrinesofthesciencehadbeen

propoundedintoorigidandabsoluteaform。Astomarketprice，theformulabywhichMillhaddefineditasthepricewhich

equalisesdemandandsupplyCairnesshowstobeanidenticalproposition，andhedefinesitasthepricewhichmost

advantageouslyadjuststheexistingsupplytotheexistingdemandpendingthecomingforwardoffreshsuppliesfromthe

sourcesofproduction。

Hissecondpartischieflyremarkableforhisdefenceofwhatisknownasthewagesfunddoctrine，towhichweadverted

whenspeakingofSenior。（58）Millhadgivenupthisdoctrine，havingbeenconvincedbyThorntonthatitwaserroneous;but

Cairnesrefusedtofollowhisleader，who，ashebelieves，oughtnottohavebeenconvinced。（59）Afterhavinggivenwhatis

certainlyafallaciousreplytoLonge’scriticismoftheexpression"averagerateofwages，"heproceedstovindicatethe

doctrineinquestionbytheconsiderationthattheamountofanation’swealthdevotedatanytietothepaymentofwages——if

thecharacterofthenationalindustriesandthemethodsofproductionemployedremainthesame——isinadefiniterelationto

theamountofitsgeneralcapital;thelatterbeinggiven，theformerisalsogiven。Inillustratinghisviewofthesubject，he

insistsontheprinciple（trueinthemain，buttooabsolutelyformulatedbyMill）that"demandforcommoditiesisnot

demandforlabour，"Itisnotnecessaryheretofollowhisinvestigation，forhisreasoninghasnotsatisfiedhissuccessors，

withtheexceptionofFawcett，andthequestionofwagesisnowcommonlytreatedwithoutreferencetoasupposed

determinatewagesfund，Cairnesnextstudiestrades—unionisminrelationtowages，andarrivesinsubstanceattheconclusion

thattheonlywayinwhichitcanaffecttheirrateisbyacceleratinganadvancewhichmustultimatelyhavetakenplace

independentlyofitsaction。HealsotakesoccasiontorefuteMr。（nowLord）Brassey’ssupposedlawofauniformcostof

labourineverypartoftheworld。Turningtoconsiderthematerialprospectsoftheworkingclasses，heexaminesthe

questionofthechangeswhichmaybeexpectedintheamountandpartitionofthefundoutgfwhichabstinenceandlabour

areremunerated。Hehereenunciatestheprinciple（whichhadbeen，however，statedbeforehimbyRicardoandSenior）that

theincreasedproductivenessofindustrywillnotaffecteitherprofitorwagesunlessitcheapenthecommoditieswhichthe

labourerconsumes。Theselatter。beingmostlycommoditiesofwhichrawproduceistheonlyorprincipalelement，theircost

ofproduction，notwithstandingimprovementsinknowledgeandart，willincreaseunlessthenumbersofthelabouringclass

besteadilykeptincheck;andhencethepossibilityofelevatingtheconditionofthelabourerisconfinedwithinverynarrow

limits，ifhecontinuestobealaboureronly。Theconditionofanysubstantialandpermanentimprovementinhislotisthathe

shouldceasetobeamerelabourer——thatprofitsshouldbebroughttoreinforcethewagesfund，whichhasatendency，inthe

courseofindustrialprogress，todeclinerelativelytothegeneralcapitalofacountry。AndhenceCairnes——abandoningthe

purelytheoreticattitudewhichheelsewhererepresentsastheonlyproperonefortheeconomist—recommendsthesystemof

so—calledco—operation（thatis，infact，theabolitionofthelargecapitalist）asofferingtotheworkingclasses"thesolemeans

ofescapefromaharshandhopelessdestiny，"andputsasiderathercontemptuouslytheoppositionofthePositiviststothis

solution，whichyetmanybesidesthePositivists，as，forexample，LeslieandF，A。Walker，regardaschimerical。

ThethirdpartisdevotedmainlytoanexpositionofRicardo’sdoctrineoftheconditionsofinternationaltradeandMill’s

theoryofinternationalvalues。TheformerCairnesmodifiesbyintroducinghisideaofthepartialinfluenceofreciprocal

demand，asdistinguishedfromcostofproduction，ontheregulationofdomesticprices，andfoundsonthisrectificationan

interestingaccountofthatconnectionbetweenthewagesprevailinginacountryandthecharacterandcourseofitsexternal

trade。HeemendsMill’sstatement，whichrepresentedtheproduceofacountryasexchangingforthatofothercountriesat

suchvalues"asarerequiredinorderthatthewholeofherexportsmayexactlypayforthewholeofherimports"by

substitutingforthelatterphrasetheconditionthateachcountryshouldbymeansofherexportsdischargeallherforeign

liabilities—inotherwords，byintroducingtheconsiderationofthebalanceofdebts。Thisideawasnotnew。ithadbeen

indicatedbyJohnLeslieFosterasearlyas1804，（60）andwastouchedonbyMillhimself;butCairnesexpoundsitwell;andit

isimportantasclearingawaycommonmisconceptions，andsometimesremovinggroundlessalarms。（61）Passingtothe

questionoffreetrade，hedisposesofsomeoften—repeatedprotectionistarguments，andinparticularrefutestheAmerican

allegationoftheinabilityofthehighly—paidlabourofthatcountrytocompetewiththe"pauperlabour"ofEurope。Heisnot

sosuccessfulinmeetingthe"politicalargument，"foundedontheadmittedimportanceforcivilizationofdeveloping

diversifiednationalindustries;andhemeetsonlybyoneofthehighlyquestionablecommonplacesofthedoctrinaire

economistsMill’spropositionthatprotectionmayfosternascentindustriesreallyadaptedtoacountrytilltheyhavestruck

rootandareabletoendurethestressofforeigncompetition。

WehavedweltatsomelengthonthisworkofCairnes，notonlybecauseitpresentsthelatestiormsofseveralaccepted

economicdoctrines，butalsobecauseitis，and，webelieve，willremain，thelastimportantproductoftheoldEnglishschool。

Theauthorattheoutsetexpressesthehopethatitwillstrengthen，andaddconsistenceto，thescientificfabric"builtupby

thelaboursofAdamSmith，Malthus，Ricardo，andMill。"WhilstrecognizingwithhimthegreatmeritsofSmith，andthereal

abilitiesandservicesofhisthreesuccessorsherenamed，wecannotentertainthesameopinionasCairnesrespectingthe

permananceofthefabrictheyconstructed。Weholdthatanewedificeisrequired，incorporatingindeedmanyofthe

materialsoftheold，butplannedondifferentideasandinsomerespectswithaviewtodifferentends——aboveall，restingon

differentphilosophicfoundations，andhavingrelationinitswholedesigntothemorecomprehensivestructureofwhichit

willformbutonedepartment，namely，thegeneralscienceofsociety。

Cairnes’sSlavePower，（1862）wasthemostvaluableworkwhichappearedonthesubjectofthegreatAmericanconflict。

FRANCE

AllthelaterEuropeanschoolspresuppose—inpartadopting，inpartcriticising——theworkoftheEnglisheconomistsfrom

Smith（62）toRicardoandtheEpigoni。TheGermanschoolhashadinagreaterdegreethananyotheramovementofits

own—following，atleastinitsmorerecentperiod，anoriginalmethod，andtendingtospecialandcharacteristicconclusions。

TheFrenchschool，ontheotherhand，—ifweomittheSocialists，whodonotherecomeunderconsideration，—hasinthemain

reproducedthedoctrinesoftheleadingEnglishthinkers，——stoppingshort，however，ingeneraloftheextremesofRicardo

andhisdisciples。InthefieldofexpositiontheFrenchareunrivalled;andinpoliticaleconomytheyhaveproducedaseriesof

moreorlessremarkablesystematictreatises，text—books，andcompendiums，attheheadofwhichstandsthecelebratedwork

ofJ。B。Say。ButthenumberofseminalmindswhichhaveappearedinFrencheconomicliteratureofwriterswhohave

contributedimportanttruths，introducedimprovementsofmethod，orpresentedthephenomenaundernewlight——hasnot

beenlarge。Sismondi，Dunoyer，andBastiatwilldeserveourattention，asbeingthemostimportantofthosewhooccupy

independentpositions（whetherpermanentlytenableornot），ifwepassoverforthepresentthegreatphilosophical

renovationofAugusteComte，whichcomprehendedactuallyorpotentiallyallthebranchesofsociologicalinquiry。Before

estimatingthelaboursofBastiat。weshallfinditdesirabletoexaminetheviewsofCarey，themostrenownedofAmerican

economists，withwhichthelatestteachingsoftheingeniousandeloquentFrenchmanare，uptoacertainpoint，in

remarkableagreement。Cournot，too，mustfindaplaceamongtheFrenchwritersofthisperiod，asthechiefrepresentative

oftheconceptionofamathematicalmethodinpoliticaleconomy。

OfJeanBaptisteSay（1767—1832）Ricardosays"Hewasthefirst，oramongthefirst，ofContinentalwriterswhojustly

appreciatedandappliedtheprinciplesofSmith，andhasdonemorethanallotherContinentalwriterstakentogetherto

recommendthatenlightenedandbeneficialsystemtothenationsofEurope。"TheWealthofNationsintheoriginallanguage

wasplacedinSay’shandsbyClavière，afterwardsminister，thendirectoroftheassurancesocietyofwhichSaywasaclerk;

andthebookmadeapowerfulimpressiononhim。Longafterwards，whenDupontdeNemourscomplainedofhisinjustice

tothephysiocrats，andclaimedhimas，throughSmith，aspiritualgrandsonofQuesnayandnephewofTurgot，hereplied

thathehadlearnedtoreadinthewritingsofthemercantileschool，hadlearnedtothinkinthoseofQuesnayandhis

followers，butthatitwasinSmiththathehadlearnedtoseekthecausesandtheeffectsofsocialphenomenainthenatureof

things，andtoarriveatthislastbyascrupulousanalysis。HisTraitsd’ÉconomiePolitique（1803）wasessentiallyfoundedon

Smith’swork，butheaimedatarrangingthematerialsinamorelogicalandinstructiveorder。（63）HehastheFrenchartof

easyandlucidexposition，thoughhisfacilitysometimesdegeneratesintosuperficiality;andhencehisbookbecamepopular，

bothdirectlyandthroughtranslationsobtainedawidecirculation，anddiffusedrapidlythroughthecivilizedworldthe

doctrinesofthemaster。Say’sknowledgeofcommonlife，saysRoscher，wasequaltoSmith’s;buthefallsfarbelowhimin

livinginsightintolargerpoliticalphenomena，andhecarefullyeschewshistoricalandphilosophicalexplanations。Heis

sometimesstrangelyshallow，aswhenhesaysthat"thebesttaxisthatsmallestinamount。"Heappearsnottohavemuch

claimtothepositionofanoriginalthinkerinpoliticaleconomy。Ricardo，indeed，speaksofhimashaving"enrichedthe

science，byseveraldiscussions，original，accurate，andprofound。"Whathehadspeciallyinviewinusingthesewordswas

whatis，perhapsratherpretentiously，calledSay’sthéoriedesdébouchés，withhisconnecteddisproofofthepossibilityofa

universalglut。Thetheoryamountssimplytothis，thatbuyingisalsoselling，andthatitisbyproducingthatweareenabled

topurchasetheproductsofothers。Severaldistinguishedeconomists，especiallyMalthusandSismondi，inconsequence

chieflyofamisinterpretationofthephenomenaofcommercialcrises，maintainedthattheremightbegeneralover—supplyor

excessofallcommoditiesabovethedemand。ThisSayrightlydenied。Aparticularbranchofproductionmay，itmustindeed

beadmitted，exceedtheexistingcapabilitiesofthemarket;but，ifwerememberthatsupplyisdemand，thatcommoditiesare

purchasingpower，wecannotacceptthedoctrineofthepossibilityofauniversalglutwithoutholdingthatwecanhavetoo

muchofeverythingthat"allmencanbesofullyprovidedwiththeprecisearticlestheydesireastoaffordnomarketfor

eachother’ssuperfluities。"Whateverservices，however，Saymayhaverenderedbyoriginalideasonthoseorothersubjects，

hisgreatmeritiscertainlythatofapropagandistandpopulariser。

Theimperialpolicewouldnotpermitasecondeditionofhisworktobeissuedwithouttheintroductionofchangeswhich，

withnobleindependence，herefusedtomake;andthateditiondidnotthereforeappeartill1814。Threeothereditionswere

publishedduringthelifeoftheauthorin1817，1819，and1826。In1828Saypublishedasecondtreatise，Courscomplet

d’éonomiePolitiquepratique，whichcontainedthesubstanceofhislecturesattheConservatoiredesArtsetMétiersandat

theCollégedeFrance。`Whilstinhisearliertreatisehehadkeptwithinthenarrowlimitsofstricteconomics，inhislater

workheenlargedthesphereofdiscussion，introducinginparticularmanyconsiderationsrespectingtheeconomicinfluence

ofsocialinstitutions。

JeanCharlesL。SimondedeSismondi（17731842），authoroftheHistoiredesRépubliquesItalienisesdismoyenâge，

representsintheeconomicfieldaprotest，foundedmainlyonhumanitariansentiment，againstthedominantdoctrinesHe

wrotefirstatreatiseDelaRichesseCommerciale（1803），inwhichhefollowedstrictlytheprinciplesofAdamSmith。Buthe

afterwardscametoregardtheseprinciplesasinsufficientandrequiringmodification。Hecontributedanarticleonpolitical

economytotheEdinburghEncyclopeadia，inwhichhisnewviewswerepartiallyindicated。Theywerefullydevelopedinhis

principaleconcmicwork，NouveauxPrincipesd’ÉconomiePolitique，oudelaRichessedanssesrapportsavecla

Population（1819;2ded。，1827）。Thiswork，ashetellsus，wasnotreceivedwithfavourbyeconomists，afactwhichhe

explainsbytheconsiderationthathehad"attackedanorthodoxyanenterprisedangerousinphilosophyasinreligion。"

Accordingtohisview，thescience，ascommonlyunderstood，wastoomuchofamerechrematistic:itstudiedtoo

exclusivelythemeansofincreasingwealth，andnotsufficientlytheuseofthiswealthforproducinggeneralhappiness。The

practicalsystemfoundedonittended，ashebelieved，notonlytomaketherichricher，buttomakethepoorpoorerand

moredependent;andhedesiredtofixattentiononthequestionofdistributionasbyfarthemostimportant，especiallyinthe

socialcircum—stancesofrecenttimes。

ThepersonalunioninSismondiofthreenationalities，theItalian，theFrench，andtheSwiss，andhiscomprehensivehistorical

studies，gavehimaspeciallargenessofview;andhewasfilledwithanoblesympathyforthesufferingmembersofsociety。

HestandsnearertosocialismthananyotherFrencheconomistproper，butitisonlyinsentiment，notinopinion，thathe

approximatestoit;hedoesnotrecommendanysocialisticscheme。Onthecontrary，hedeclaresinamemorablepassage

that，whilstheseeswherejusticelies，hemustconfesshimselfunabletosuggestthemeansofrealisingitinpractice;the

divisionofthefruitsofindustrybetweenthosewhoareunitedintheirproductionappearstohimvicious;butitis，inhis

judgment，almostbeyondhumanpowertoconceiveanysystemofpropertyabsolutelydifferentfromthatwhichisknownto

usbyexperience。Hegoesnofurtherthanprotesting，inviewofthegreatevilswhichhesawaroundhim，againstthe

doctrineoflaisserfaire，andinvoking，somewhatvaguely，theinterventionofGovernmentstoregulatetheprogressof

wealthandtoprotecttheweakermembersofthecommunity。

Hisfrankconfessionofimpotence，farwiserandmorehonourablethanthesuggestionofprecipitateanddangerous

remedies，orofarecurrencetooutwornmediaevalinstitutions，hasnotaffectedthereputationofthework。Aprejudicewas

indeedearlycreatedagainstitinconsequenceofitspartialharmonyoftone，though，aswehaveseen，notofpolicy，with

socialism，whichwasthenbeginningtoshowitsstrength，aswellasbytherudewayinwhichhisdescriptionsofthemodern

industrialsystem，especiallyasitexistedinEngland，disturbedthecomplacentoptimismofsomemembersoftheso—called

orthodoxschool。Thesetreatedthebookwithill—disguisedcontempt，andBastiatspokeofitaspreachinganéconomie

politiqueàrebours。Butithashelditsplaceintheliteratureofthescience，andisnowevenmoreinterestingthanwhenit

firstappeared，becauseinourtimethereisamoregeneraldisposition，insteadofdenyingorglossingovertheseriousevils

ofindustrialsociety，tofaceandremoveoratleastmitigatethem。Thelaisserfairedoctrine，too，hasbeendiscreditedin

theoryandabandonedinpractice;andwearereadytoadmitSismondi’sviewoftheStateasapowernotmereintrusted

withthemaintenanceofpeace，butchargedalsowiththemissionofextendingthebenefitsofthesocialunionandofmodern

progressaswidelyaspossiblethroughallclassesofthecommunity。Yettheimpressionwhichhistreatiseleavesbehinditis

adiscouragingone;andthisbecauseheregardsasessentiallyevilmanythingswhichseemtobethenecessaryresultsofthe

developmentofindustry。Thegrowthofawealthycapitalistclassandofmanufactureonthegreatscale，theriseofavast

bodyofworkerswholivebytheirlabouralone，theextendedapplicationofmachines，largelandedpropertiescultivatedwith

theaidofthemostadvancedappliancesallthesehedislikesanddeprecates;buttheyappeartobeinevitable。Theproblem

is，howtoregulateandmoralisethesystemtheyimply;butwemustsurelyacceptitinprinciple，unlessweaimatathorough

socialrevolution。SismondimayberegardedastheprecursoroftheGermaneconomistsknownundertheinexact

designationofSocialistsoftheChair;buttheirwritingsaremuchmorehopefulandinspiring。

Tothesubjectofpopulationhedevotesspecialcare，asofgreatimportanceforthewelfareoftheworkingclasses。Sofaras

agriculturistsareconcerned，hethinksthesystemofwhathecallspatriarchalexploitation，wherethecultivatorisalso

proprietor，andisaidedbyhisfamilyintillingthelandalawofequaldivisionamongthenaturalheirsbeingapparently

presupposedtheonewhichismostefficaciousinpreventinganundueincreaseofthepopulation。Thefatheris，insucha

case，abledistinctlytoestimatetheresourcesavailableforhischildren，andtodeterminethestageofsub—divisionwhich

wouldnecessitatethedescentofthefamilyfromthematerialandsocialpositionithadpreviouslyoccupied。Whenchildren

beyondthislimitareborn，theydonotmarry，ortheychooseamongsttheirnumberonetocontinuetherace。Thisisthe

viewwhich，adoptedbyJ。S。Mill，makessogreatafigureinthetoofavourablepresentationbythatwriterofthesystemof

peasantproprietors。

InnoFrencheconomicwriterisgreaterforceorgeneralsolidityofthoughttobefoundthaninCharlesDunoyer

（17861862），authorofLaLibertéduTravail（1845;thesubstanceofthefirstvolumehadappearedunderadifferenttitlein

1825），honourablyknownforhisintegrityandindependenceundertherégimeoftheRestoration。Whatmakeshimofspecial

importanceinthehistoryofthescienceishisviewofitsphilosophicalconstitutionandmethod。Withrespecttomethod，he

strikesthekeynoteattheveryoutsetinthewords"rechercherexpérimentalement，"andinprofessingtobuildon"les

donnéesdel’observationetdel’expérience。"Heshowsamarkedtendencytowideneconomicsintoageneralscienceof

society，expresslydescribingpoliticaleconomyashavingforitsprovincethewholeorderofthingswhichresultsfromthe

exerciseanddevelopmentofthesocialforces。ThislargerstudyisindeedbetternamedSociology;andeconomicstudiesare

betterregardedasformingonedepartmentofit。Buttheessentialcircumstanceisthat，inDunoyer’streatmentofhisgreat

subject，thewidestintellectual，moral，andpoliticalconsiderationsareinseparablycombinedwithpurelyeconomicideas。It

mustnotbesupposedthatbyliberty，inthetitleofhiswork，ismeantmerelyfreedomfromlegalrestraintoradministrative

interference;heusesittoexpresswhatevertendstogiveincreasedefficiencytolabour。Heisthusledtodiscussallthe

causesofhumanprogress，andtoexhibitthemintheirhistoricalworking。