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）;