Treating，inthefirstpart，oftheinfluenceofexternalconditions，ofrace，andofcultureonlibertyinthiswidersense，he
proceedstodivideallproductiveeffortintotwogreatclasses，accordingastheactionisexercisedonthingsoronmen，and
censurestheeconomistsforhavingrestrictedtheirattentiontotheformer。Hestudiesinhissecondandthirdparts
respectivelytheconditionsoftheefficiencyofthesetwoformsofhumanexertion。Intreatingofeconomiclife，strictlyso
called，heintroduceshisfourfolddivisionofmaterialindustry，inpartadoptedbyJ。S。Mill，as"（1）extractive，（2）voiturière，
（3）manufacturièure，（4）agricole，"adivisionwhichisusefulforphysicaleconomics，butwillalways，whenthelargersocial
aspectofthingsisconsidered，beinferiortothemorecommonlyacceptedoneintoagricultural，manufacturing，and
commercialindustry，bankingbeingsupposedascommonpresidentandregulator。Dunoyer，havinginviewonlyactionon
materialobjects，relegatesbanking，aswellascommerceproper，totheseparateheadofexchange，which，alongwith
associationandgratuitoustransmission（whetherintervivosormortiscausa），heclassesapartasbeing，notindustries，inthe
samesensewiththeoccupationsnamed，butyetfunctionsessentialtothesocialeconomy。Theindustrieswhichactonman
hedividesaccordingastheyoccupythemselveswith（1）theameliorationofourphysicalnature，（2）thecultureofour
imaginationandsentiments，（3）theeducationofourintelligence，and（4）theimprovementofourmoralhabits;andhe
proceedsaccordinglytostudythesocialofficesofthephysician，theartist，theeducator，andthepriest。WemeetinDunoyer
theideasafterwardsemphasisedbyBastiatthattherealsubjectsofhumanexchangeareservices;thatallvalueisdueto
humanactivity;thatthepowersofnaturealwaysrenderagratuitousassistancetothelabourofmanandthattherentofland
isreallyaformofinterestoninvestedcapital。Thoughhehaddisclaimedthetaskofapracticaladviserintheoften—quoted
sentence"Jen’imposerien;jeneproposemêmerien;j’exposé，"hefindshimself，likealleconomists，unabletoabstainfrom
offeringcounsel。Andhispolicyisopposedtoanystateinterferencewithindustry。Indeedhepreachesinitsextremerigour
thelaisserfairedoctrine，whichhemaintainsprincipallyonthegroundthatthespontaneouseffortsoftheindividualforthe
improvementofhiscondition，bydevelopingforesight，energy，andperseverance，arethemostefficientmeansofsocial
culture。ButhecertainlygoestoofarwhenherepresentstheactionofGovernmentsasnormallyalwaysrepressiveandnever
directive。Hewasdoubtlessledintothisexaggerationbyhisoppositiontotheartificialorganizationsoflabourproposedby
somanyofhiscontemporaries，againstwhichhehadtovindicatetheprincipleofcompetition;buthiscriticismofthese
schemestook，asComteremarks，tooabsoluteacharacter，tendingtotheperpetualinterdictionofatruesystematisationof
industry。（64）
AMERICA
AtthispointitwillbeconvenienttoturnasideandnoticethedoctrinesoftheAmericaneconomistCarey。Notmuchhad
beendonebeforehiminthesciencebycitizensoftheUnitedStates。BenjaminFranklin，otherwiseofworld—widerenown，
wasauthorofanumberoftracts，inmostofwhichhemerelyenforcespracticallessonsofindustryandthrift，butinsome
throwsoutinterestingtheoreticideas。Thus，fiftyyearsbeforeSmith，hesuggested（asPetty，however，hadalreadydone）
humanlabourasthetruemeasureofvalue（ModestInquiryintotheNatureandNecessityofaPaperCurrency，1721），and
inhisObservationsconcerningtheIncreaseofMankind（1751）heexpressesviewsakintothoseofMalthus。Alexander
Hamilton，secretaryofthetreasury，in1791presentedinhisofficialcapacitytotheHouseofRepresentativesoftheUnited
StatesaReportonthemeasuresbywhichhomemanufacturescouldbepromoted。（65）Inthisdocumenthegivesacritical
accountofthetheoryofthesubject，representsSmith’ssystemoffreetradeaspossibleinpracticeonlyifadoptedbyall
nationssimultaneously，ascribestomanufacturesagreaterproductivenessthantoagriculture，andseekstorefutethe
objectionsagainstthedevelopmentoftheformerinAmericafoundedonthewantofcapital，thehighrateofwages，andthe
lowpriceofland。TheconclusionatwhichhearrivesisthatforthecreationofAmericanmanufacturesasystemofmoderate
protectivedutieswasnecessary，andheproceedstodescribetheparticularfeaturesofsuchasystem。Thereissomereason
tobelievethattheGermaneconomistList，ofwhomweshallspeakhereafter，wasinfluencedbyHamilton’swork，having，
duringhisexilefromhisnativecountry，residedintheUnitedStates。
HenryCharlesCarey（17931879），sonofanAmericancitizenwhohademigratedfromIreland，representsareaction
againstthedispiritingcharacterwhichtheSmithiandoctrineshadassumedinthehandsofMalthusandRicardo。Hisaim
was，whilstadheringtotheindividualisticeconomy，toplaceitonahigherandsurerbasis，andfortifyitagainsttheassaults
ofsocialism，towhichsomeoftheRicardiantenetshadexposedit。Themostcomprehensiveaswellasmatureexpositionof
hisviewsiscontainedinhisPrinciplesofSocialScience（1859）。Inspiredwiththeoptimisticsentimentnaturaltoayoung
andrisingnationwithabundantundevelopedresourcesandanunboundedoutlooktowardsthefuture，heseekstoshowthat
thereexists，independentlyofhumanwills，anaturalsystemofeconomiclaws，whichisessentiallybeneficent，andofwhich
theincreasingprosperityofthewholecommunity，andespeciallyoftheworkingclasses，isthespontaneousresult，capable
ofbeingdefeatedonlybytheignoranceorperversityofmanresistingorimpedingitsaction。HerejectstheMalthusian
doctrineofpopulation，maintainingthatnumbersregulatethem—selvessufficientlyineverywell—governedsociety，andthat
theirpressureonsubsistencecharacterisesthelower，notthemoreadvanced，stagesofcivilization。Herightlydeniesthe
universaltruth，forallstagesofcultivation，ofthelawofdiminishingreturnsfromland。Hisfundamentaltheoreticposition
relatestotheantithesisofwealthandvalue。
Wealthhadbeenbymosteconomistsconfoundedwiththesumofexchangevalues;evenSmith，thoughatfirst
distinguishingthem，afterwardsallowedhimselftofallintothiserror。Ricardohad，indeed，pointedoutthedifference，but
onlytowardstheendofhistreatise，inthebodyofwhichvaluealoneisconsidered。ThelaterEnglisheconomistshadtended
toregardtheirstudiesasconversantonlywithexchange;sofarhadthisproceededthatWhatelyhadproposedforthe
sciencethenameofCatallactics。Whenwealthisconsideredaswhatitreallyis，thesumofusefulproducts，weseethatit
hasitsorigininexternalnatureassupplyingbothmaterialsandphysicalforces，andinhumanlabourasappropriatingand
adaptingthosenaturalmaterialsandforces。Naturegivesherassistancegratuitously;labouristhesolefoundationofvalue。
Thelesswecanappropriateandemploynaturalforcesinanyproductionthehigherthevalueoftheproduct，butthelessthe
additiontoourwealthinproportiontothelabourexpended。Wealth，initstruesenseofthesumofusefulthings，isthe
measureofthepowerwehaveacquiredovernature，whilstthevalueofanobjectexpressestheresistanceofnaturewhich
labourhastoovercomeinordertoproducetheobject。Wealthsteadilyincreasesinthecourseofsocialprogress;the
exchangevalueofobjects，ontheotherhand，decreases。Humanintellectandfacultyofsocialcombinationsecureincreased
commandovernaturalpowers，andusethemmorelargelyinproduction，whilstlesslabourisspentinachievingeachresult，
andthevalueoftheproductaccordinglyfalls。ThevalueofthearticleisnotfixedbyitsCostofproductioninthepast;what
reallydeterminesitisthecostwhichisnecessaryforitsreproductionunderthepresentconditionsofknowledgeandskill。
Thedependenceofvalueoncost，sointerpreted，Careyholdstobeuniversallytrue;whilstRicardomaintaineditonlywith
respecttoobjectscapableofindefinitemultiplication，andinparticulardidnotregarditasapplicabletothecaseofland。
Ricardosawintheproductivepowersoflandafreegiftofnaturewhichhadbeenmonopolisedbyacertainnumberof
persons，andwhichbecame，withtheincreaseddemandforfood，alargerandlargervalueinthehandsofitspossessors。To
thisvalue，however，asnotbeingtheresultoflabour，theowner，itmightbemaintained，hadnorightfulclaim;hecouldnot
justlydemandapaymentforwhatwasdonebythe"originalandindestructiblepowersofthesoil。"ButCareyheldthatland，
asweareconcernedwithitinindustriallife，isreallyaninstrumentofproductionwhichhasbeenformedassuchbyman，
andthatitsvalueisduetothelabourexpendedonitinthepast，thoughmeasured，notbythesumofthatlabour，butbythe
labournecessaryunderexistingconditionstobringnewlandtothesamestageofproductiveness。Hestudiestheoccupation
andreclamationoflandwithpeculiaradvantageasanAmerican，forwhomthetraditionsoffirstsettlementarelivingand
fresh，andbeforewhoseeyestheprocessisindeedstillgoingon。Thedifficultiesofadaptingaprimitivesoiltotheworkof
yieldingorganicproductsforman’susecanbelightlyestimatedonlybyaninhabitantofacountrylongundercultivation。It
is，inCarey’sview，theovercomingofthesedifficultiesbyarduousandcontinuedeffortthatentitlesthefirstoccupierofland
tohispropertyinthesoil。Itspresentvalueformsaverysmallproportionofthecostexpendedonit，becauseitrepresents
onlywhatwouldberequired，withthescienceandappliancesofourtime，tobringthelandfromitsprimitiveintoitspresent
state。Propertyinlandisthereforeonlyaformofinvestedcapitalaquantityoflabourorthefruitsoflabourpermanently
incorporatedwiththesoil;forwhich，likeanyothercapitalist，theowneriscompensatedbyashareoftheproduce。Heisnot
rewardedforwhatisdonebythepowersofnature，andsocietyisinnosensedefraudedbyhissolepossession。The
so—calledRicardiantheoryofrentisaspeculativefancy，contradictedbyallexperience。Cultivationdoesnotinfact，asthat
theorysupposes，beginwiththebest，andmovedownwardstothepoorersoilsintheorderoftheirinferiority。（66）Thelight
anddryhigherlandsarefirstcultivated;andonlywhenpopulationhasbecomedenseandcapitalhasaccumulated，arethe
low—lyinglands，withtheirgreaterfertility，butalsowiththeirmorasses，inundations，andmiasmas，attackedandbrought
intooccupation。Rent，regardedasaproportionoftheproduce，sinks，likeallinterestoncapital，inprocessoftime，but，as
anabsoluteamount，increases。Theshareofthelabourerincreases，bothasaproportionandanabsoluteamount。Andthus
theinterestofthesedifferentsocialclassesareinharmony。
But，Careyproceedstosay，inorderthatthisharmoniousprogressmayberealised，whatistakenfromthelandmustbe
givenbacktoit。Allthearticlesderivedfromitarereallyseparatedpartsofit，whichmustberestoredonpainofits
exhaustion。Hencetheproducerandtheconsumermustbeclosetoeachother;theproductsmustnotbeexportedtoa
foreigncountryinexchangeforitsmanufactures，andthusgotoenrichasmanureaforeignsoil。Inimmediateexchange
valuethelandownermaygainbysuchexportation，buttheproductivepowersofthelandwillsuffer。AndthusCarey，who
hadsetoutasanearnestadvocateoffreetrade，arrivesatthedoctrineofprotection:the"co—ordinatingpower"insociety
mustintervenetopreventprivateadvantagefromworkingpublicmischief。（67）Heattributeshisconversiononthequestionto
hisobservationoftheeffectsofliberalandprotectivetariffsrespectivelyonAmericanprosperity。Thisobservation，hesays，
threwhimbackontheory，andledhimtoseethattheinterventionreferredtomightbenecessarytoremove（ashephrases
it）theobstaclestotheprogressofyoungercommunitiescreatedbytheactionofolderandwealthiernations。Butitseems
probablethattheinfluenceofList’swritings，addedtohisowndeep—rootedandhereditaryjealousyanddislikeofEnglish
predominance，hadsomethingtodowithhischangeofattitude。
Thepracticalconclusionatwhichhethusarrived，thoughitisbynomeansincontradictiontothedoctrineoftheexistence
ofnaturaleconomiclaws，accordsbutillwithhisoptimisticscheme;andanothereconomist，FredericBastiat，acceptinghis
fundamentalideas，appliedhimselftoremovetheforeignaccretion，asheregardedit，andtopreachthetheoryof
spontaneoussocialharmoniesinrelationwiththepracticeoffreetradeasitslegitimateoutcome。（68）FRANCE（continued）
Bastiat（1801—1850），thoughnotaprofoundthinker，wasabrilliantandpopularwriteroneconomicquestions。Thoughhe
alwayshadaninclinationforsuchstudies，hewasfirstimpelledtotheactivepropagationofhisviewsbyhisearnest
sympathywiththeEnglishanti—corn—lawagitation。Naturallyofanardenttemperament，hethrewhimselfwithzealintothe
free—tradecontroversy，throughwhichhehopedtoinfluenceFrencheconomicpolicy，andpublishedin1845ahistoryofthe
struggleunderthetitleofCobdenetLaLigue。In184548appearedhisSophismeséconomiques（Eng。trans。byG。R。
Porter，1849，andbyP。J。Stirling，1873），inwhichheexhibitedhisbestqualitiesofmind。ThoughCairnesgoestoofarin
comparingthisworkwiththeLettresProvinciales，itiscertainlymarkedbymuchliveliness，point，andvigour。Butto
exposetheabsurditiesoftheordinaryprotectionismwasnodifficulttask;itisonlyinsuchaformasthepolicyassumedin
theschemeofList，aspurelyprovisionalandpreparatory，thatitdeservesanddemandsconsideration。Aftertherevolution
of1848，whichforatimeputanendtothefree—trademovementinFrance，theeffortsofBastiatweredirectedagainstthe
socialists。BesidesseveralminorpiecespossessingthesamesortofmeritastheSophismes，heproduced，withaviewtothis
controversy，hismostambitiousaswellascharacteristicwork，theHarmoniesÉconomiques（Eng。trans。byP。J。Stirling，
1860）。Onlythefirstvolumewaspublished;itappearedin1850，anditsauthordiedinthesameyear。Sincethenthenotes
andsketcheswhichhehadpreparedsmaterialstowardstheproductionofthesecondvolumehavebeengiventothepublic
inthecollectededitionofhiswritings（byPaillottet，withLifebyFontenay，7vols。），andwecanthusgatherwhatwould
havebeenthespiritandsubstanceofthelaterportionsofthebook。
Itwillalwaysbehistoricallyinterestingasthelastincarnationofthoroughgoingeconomicoptimism。Thisoptimism，
recurringtoitsfirstorigin，setsoutfromtheologicalconsiderations，andBastiatiscommendedbyhisEnglishtranslatorfor
treatingpoliticaleconomy"inconnectionwithfinalcauses。"Thespiritoftheworkistorepresent"allprinciples，allmotives，
allspringsofaction，allinterests，asco—operatingtowardsagrandfinalresultwhichhumanitywillneverreach，buttowhich
itwillalwaysincreasinglytend，namely，theindefiniteapproximationofallclassestowardsalevel，whichsteadilyrises，in
otherwords，theequalisationofindividualsinthegeneralamelioration。"
Whatclaimedtobenovelandpeculiarinhisschemewasprincipallyhistheoryofvalue。Insistingontheideathatvaluedoes
notdenoteanythinginherentintheobjectstowhichitisattributed，heendeavouredtoshowthatitneversignifiesanything
buttheratiooftwo"services。’’Thisviewhedevelopswithgreatvarietyandfelicityofillustration。Onlythemutualservices
ofhumanbeings，accordingtohim，possess—valueandcanclaimaretribution;theassistancegivenbynaturetotheworkof
productionisalwayspurelygratuitous，andneverentersintoprice。Economicprogress，as，forexample，theimprovement
andlargeruseofmachinery，tendsperpetuallytotransfermoreandmoreoftheelementsofutilityfromthedomainof
property，andthereforeofvalue，intothatofcommunity，orofuniversalandunpurchasedenjoyment。Itwillbeobservedthat
thistheoryissubstantiallyidenticalwithCarey’s，whichhadbeenearlierpropounded;andthelatterauthorinsomanywords
allegesittohavebeentakenfromhimwithoutacknowledgment。Ithasnotperhapsbeensufficientlyattendedtothatvery
similarviewsarefoundinDunoyer，ofwhoseworkBastiatspokeasexercisingapowerfulinfluenceon"therestorationof
thescience，"andwhomFontenay，thebiographerofBastiat，tellsusherecognisedasoneofhismasters，CharlesComte（69）beingtheother。
Themodewhichhasjustbeenexplainedofconceivingindustrialactionandindustrialprogressisinterestingandinstructive
sofarasitisreallyapplicable，butitwasundulygeneralised。CairneshaswellpointedoutthatBastiat’stheoreticsoundness
wasinjuriouslyaffectedbyhishabitofstudyingdoctrineswithadirectviewtocontemporarysocialandpolitical
controversies。Hewasthuspredisposedtoacceptviewswhichappearedtolendasanctiontolegitimateandvaluable
institutions，andtorejectthosewhichseemedtohimtoleadtodangerousconsequences。Hisconstantaimis，ashehimself
expressedit，to"breaktheweapons"ofanti—socialreasoners"intheirhands，"andthispreoccupationinterfereswiththe
single—mindedefforttowardstheattainmentofscientifictruth。Thecreationoradoptionofhistheoryofvaluewasinspired
bythewishtomeetthesocialisticcriticismofpropertyinland;fortheexigenciesofthiscontroversyitwasdesirabletobe
abletoshowthatnothingiseverpaidforexceptpersonaleffort。Hisviewofrentwas，therefore，sotospeak，fore—
ordained，thoughitmayhavebeensuggested，asindeedtheeditorofhisposthumousfragmentsadmitsbythewritingsof
Carey。Heheld，withtheAmericanauthor，thatrentispurelytherewardofthepainsandexpenditureofthelandlordorhis
predecessorsintheprocessofconvertingthenaturalsoilintoafarmbyclearing，draining，fencing，andtheotherspeciesof
permanentimprovements。（70）Hethusgetsridofthe（so—called）Ricardiandoctrine，whichwasacceptedbythesocialists，and
bythemusedforthepurposeofassailingtheinstitutionoflandedproperty，or，atleast，ofsupportingaclaimof
compensationtothecommunityfortheappropriationofthelandbytheconcessionofthe"righttolabour。"AsCairneshas
said，（71）"whatBastiatdidwasthis:havingbeenatinfinitepainstoexcludegratuitousgiftsofnaturefromthepossible
elementsofvalue，andpointedlyidentified"[rather，associated]"thephenomenonwith`humaneffort’asitsexclusivesource，
hedesignateshumaneffortbytheterm`service，’andthenemploysthistermtoadmitassourcesofvaluethosevery
gratuitousnaturalgiftstheexclusionofwhichinthiscapacityconstitutedtheessenceofhisdoctrine。"Thejusticeofthis
criticismwillbeapparenttoanyonewhoconsidersthewayinwhichBastiattreatsthequestionofthevalueofadiamond。
Thatwhatispaidforinmostcasesofhumandealingsiseffortnoonecandispute。Butitissurelyareductioadabsurdumof
histheoryofvalue，regardedasadoctrineofuniversalapplication，torepresentthepriceofadiamondwhichhasbeen
accidentallyfoundasremunerationfortheeffortofthefinderinappropriatingandtransmittingit。And，withrespecttoland，
whilstalargepartofrent，inthepopularsense，mustbeexplainedasinterestoncapital，itisplainthatthenativepowersof
thesoilarecapableofappropriation，andthatthenapricecanbedemandedandwillbepaidfortheiruse。
Bastiatisweakonthephilosophicalside;heisfilledwiththeideasoftheologicalteleology，andisledbytheseideastoform
aprioriopinionsofwhatexistingfactsandlawsmustnecessarilybe。Andthejusnature，which，likemetaphysicalideas
generally，hasitsrootintheology，isasmuchapostulatewithhimaswiththephysiocrats。Thus，inhisessayonFreeTrade，
hesays:"Exchangeisanaturalrightlikeproperty。Everycitizenwhohascreatedoracquiredaproductoughttohavethe
optionofeitherapplyingitimmediatelytohisownuseorcedingittowhosoeveronthesurfaceoftheglobeconsentsto
givehiminexchangetheobjectofhisdesires。"SomethingofthesamesorthadbeensaidbyTurgot;andinhistimethisway
ofregardingthingswasexcusable，andevenprovisionallyuseful;butinthemiddleofthe19thcenturyitwastimethatit
shouldbeseenthroughandabandonedBastiathadarealenthusiasmforasciencewhichhethoughtdestinedtorendergreatservicestomankind，andheseemsto
havebelievedintenselythedoctrineswhichgaveaspecialcolourtohisteaching。Ifhisoptimisticexaggerationsfavouredthe
propertiedclasses，theycertainlywerenotpromptedbyself—interestorservility。Buttheyareexaggerations;and，amidstthe
modernconflictsofcapitalandlabour，hisperpetualassertionofsocialharmoniesisthecryof"peace，peace，"wherethereis
nopeace。Thefreedomofindustry，whichhetreatedasapanacea，hasundoubtedlybroughtwithitgreatbenefits;buta
sufficientexperiencehasshownthatitisinadequatetosolvethesocialproblem。Howcantheadvocatesofeconomic
revolutionbemetbyassuringthemthateverythinginthenaturaleconomyisharmoniousthat，infact，alltheyseekfor
alreadyexists？Acertaindegreeofspontaneousharmonydoesindeedexist，forsocietycouldnotcontinuewithoutit，butit
isimperfectandprecarious;thequestionis，Howcanwegivetoitthemaximumofcompletenessandstability？
AugustinCournot（18011877）appearstohavebeenthefirst（72）who，withacompetentknowledgeofbothsubjects，
endeavouredtoapplymathematicstothetreatmentofeconomicquestions。HistreatiseentitledRecherchessurlesPrincipes
MathématiquesdeLaThéoriedesRichesseswaspublishedin1838。Hementionsinitonlyonepreviousenterpriseofthe
samekind（thoughtherehadinfactbeenothers）that，namely，ofNicolasFrançoisCanard，whosebook，publishedin1802，
wascrownedbytheInstitute，though"itsprincipleswereradicallyfalseaswellaserroneouslyapplied。"Notwithstanding
Cournot’sjustreputationasawriteronmathematics，theRecherchesmadelittleimpression。Thetruthseemstobethathis
resultsareinsomecasesoflittleimportance，inothersofquestionablecorrectness，andthat，intheabstractionstowhichhe
hasrecourseinordertofacilitatehiscalculations，anessentialpartoftherealconditionsoftheproblemissometimes
omitted。Hispagesaboundinsymbolsrepresentingunknownfunctions，theformofthefunctionbeinglefttobeascertained
byobservationoffacts，whichhedoesnotregardasapartofhistask，oronlysomeknownpropertiesoftheundetermined
functionbeingusedasbasesfordeduction。Jevonsincludesinhislistofworksinwhichamathematicaltreatmentof
economicsisadoptedasecondtreatisewhichCournotpublishedin1863，withthetitlePrincipesdeLaThéoriedes
Richesses。Butinreality，intheworksonamed，whichiswrittenwithgreatability，andcontainsmuchforciblereasoningin
oppositiontotheexaggerationsoftheordinaryeconomists，themathematicalmethodisabandoned，andthereisnotan
algebraicalformulainthebook。Theauthoradmitsthatthepublichasalwaysshownarepugnancetotheuseof
mathematicalsymbolsineconomicdiscussion，and，thoughhethinkstheymightbeofserviceinfacilitatingexposition，fixing
theideas，andsuggestingfurtherdevelopments，heacknowledgesthatagravedangerattendstheiruse。Thedanger，
accordingtohim，consistsintheprobabilitythatanunduevaluemaybeattachedtotheabstracthypothesesfromwhichthe
investigatorsetsout，andwhichenablehimtoconstructhisformulae。Andhispracticalconclusionisthatmathematical
processesshouldbeemployedonlywithgreatprecaution，orevennotemployedatallifthepublicjudgmentisagainstthem，
for"thisjudgment，"hesays，"hasitssecretreasons，almostalwaysmoresurethanthosewhichdeterminetheopinionsof
individuals。"Itisanobviousconsiderationthattheacceptanceofunsoundorone—sidedabstractprinciplesasthepremisesof
argumentdoesnotdependontheuseofmathematicalforms，thoughitispossiblethattheemploymentofthelattermayby
associationproduceanillusioninfavourofthecertaintyofthosepremises。Butthegreatobjectiontotheuseofmathematics
ineconomicreasoningisthatitisnecessarilysterile。Ifweexaminetheattemptswhichhavebeenmadetoemployit，we
shallfindthatthefundamentalconceptionsonwhichthedeductionsaremadetorestarevague，indeedmetaphysical，intheir
character。Unitsofanimalormoralsatisfaction，ofutility，andthelike，areasforeigntopositivescienceasaunitof
normativefacultywouldbe;andaunitofvalue，unlessweunderstandbyvaluethequantityofonecommodityexchangeable
undergivenconditionsforanother，isanequallyindefiniteidea。Mathematicscanindeedformulateratiosofexchangewhen
theyhaveoncebeenobserved;butitcannotbyanyprocessofitsowndeterminethoseratios，forquantitativeconclusions
implyquantitativepremises，andthesearewanting。Thereisthennofutureforthiskindofstudy，anditisonlywasteof
intellectualpowertopursueit。Buttheimportanceofmathematicsasaneducationalintroductiontoallthehigherordersof
researchisnotaffectedbythisconclusion。Thestudyofthephysicalmedium，orenvironment，inwhicheconomic
phenomenatakeplace，andbywhichtheyareaffected，requiresmathematicsasaninstrument;andnothingcaneverdispense
withthedidacticefficacyofthatscience，assupplyingtheprimordialtypeofrationalinvestigation，givingthelively
sentimentofdecisiveproof，anddisincliningthemindtoillusoryconceptionsandsophisticalcombinations。Andaknowledge
ofatleastthefundamentalprinciplesofmathematicsisnecessarytoeconomiststokeepthemrightintheirstatementsof
doctrine，andpreventtheirenunciatingpropositionswhichhavenodefinitemeaning。Evendistinguishedwriterssometimes
betrayaseriousdeficiencyinthisrespect;thustheyassertthatonequantity"variesinverselyas"another，whenwhatis
meantisthatthesum（nottheproduct）ofthetwoisconstant;andtheytreatascapableofnumericalestimationtheamount
ofanaggregateofelementswhich，differinginkind，cannotbereducedtoacommonstandard。Asanexampleofthelatter
error，itmaybementionedthat"quantityoflabour，"sooftenspokenofbyRicardo，andinfactmadethebasisofhissystem，
includessuchvariousspeciesofexertionaswillnotadmitofsummationorcomparison。
ITALY
ThefirstItaliantranslationoftheWealthofNationsappearedin1780。ThemostdistinguishedItalianeconomistofthe
periodheredealtwithwas，however，nodiscipleofSmith。ThiswasMelehiorreGioja，author，besidesstatisticalandother
writings，ofavoluminousworkentitledNuovoProspettodelleScienzeEconomiche（6vols。，181517;theworkwasnever
completed），intendedtobeanencyclopaediaofallthathadbeentaughtbytheorists，enactedbyGovernments，oreffectedby
populationsinthefieldofpublicandprivateeconomyItisalearnedandabletreatise，butsooverladenwithquotationsand
tablesastorepelratherthanattractreaders。GiojaadmiredthepracticaleconomicsystemofEngland，andenlargesonthe
advantagesofterritorialproperties，manufactures，andmercantileenterprisesonthelargeasopposedtothesmallscale。He
defendsarestrictivepolicy，andinsistsonthenecessityoftheactionofthestateasaguiding，supervising，andregulating
powerintheindustria]world。Butheisinfullsympathywiththesentimentofhisageagainstecclesiasticaldominationand
othermediaevalsurvivals。WecanbutverybrieflynoticeRomagnosi（d。1835），who，byhiscontributionstoperiodical
literature，andbyhispersonalteaching，greatlyinfluencedthecourseofeconomicthoughtinItaly;AntonioScialoja
（Principiid’EconomiaSociale，1840;andCarestiaeGoverno，1853），anableadvocateoffreetrade（d。1877）Luigi
Cibrario，wellknownastheauthorofEconomiaPoliticadelmedicevo（1839;5thed。，1861:Frenchtrans。byBarneaud，
1859），whichisinfactaviewofthewholesocialsystemofthatperiod;GirolamoBoccardo（b。1829;Trattato
Teorico—praticodiEconomiaPolitica，1853）;