In1848BrunoHildebrand（18121878）publishedthefirstvolumeofawork，which，thoughhelivedformanyyearsafter，
　　henevercontinued，entitledDieNationalökonomiederGegenwartundZukunft。Hildebrandwasathinkerofareallyhigh
　　order;itmaybedoubtedwhetheramongstGermaneconomiststherehasbeenanyendowedwithamoreprofoundand
　　searchingintellect。HeisquitefreefromthewordinessandobscuritywhichtoooftencharacteriseGermanwriters，and
　　tracesbroadoutlineswithasureandpowerfulhand。Hisbookcontainsamasterlycriticismoftheeconomicsystemswhich
　　preceded，orbelongedto，histime，includingthoseofSmith，Muller，List，andthesocialists。Butitisinterestingtousat
　　presentmainlyfromthegeneralpositionhetakesup，andhisconceptionoftherealnatureofpoliticaleconomy。Theobject
　　ofhiswork，hetellsus，istoopenawayintheeconomicdomaintoathoroughhistoricaldirectionandmethod，andto
　　transformthescienceintoadoctrineofthelawsoftheeconomicdevelopmentofnations。Itisinterestingtoobservethatthe
　　typewhichhesetsbeforehiminhisproposedreformofpoliticaleconomyisnotthatofhistoricaljurisprudence，butofthe
　　scienceoflanguageasithasbeenreconstructedinthei9thcentury，aselectionwhichindicatesthecomparativemethodas
　　theonewhichheconsideredappropriate。Inbothscienceswehavethepresenceofanorderedvariationintime，andthe
　　consequentsubstitutionoftherelativefortheabsolute。
　　In1853appearedtheworkofKarlKnies（18211898），entitledDiePolitischeOekonomievonStandpunkteder
　　geschichtlichenMethode。Thisisanelaborateexpositionanddefenceofthehistoricalmethodinitsapplicationtoeconomic
　　science，andisthemostsystematicandcompletemanifestoofthenewschool，atleastonthelogicalside。Thefundamental
　　propositionsarethattheeconomicconstitutionofsocietyatanyepochontheonehand，andontheotherthecontemporary
　　theoreticconceptionofeconomicscience，areresultsofadefinitehistoricaldevelopment;thattheyarebothinvital
　　connectionwiththewholesocialorganismoftheperiod，havinggrownupalongwithitandunderthesameconditionsof
　　time，place，andnationality;thattheeconomicsystemmustthereforeberegardedaspassingthroughaseriesofphases
　　correlativewiththesuccessivestagesofcivilization，andcanatnopointofthismovementbeconsideredtohaveattainedan
　　entirelydefinitiveform;thatnomorethepresentthananypreviouseconomicorganizationofsocietyistoberegardedas
　　absolutelygoodandright，butonlyasaphaseinacontinuoushistoricalevolution;andthatinlikemannerthenowprevalent
　　economicdoctrineisnottobeviewedascompleteandfinal，butonlyasrepresentingacertainstageintheunfoldingor
　　progressivemanifestationofthetruth。
　　Thethemeofthebookishandledwith，perhaps，anunduedegreeofexpansionanddetail。Theauthorexhibitsmuchsagacity
　　aswellaslearning，andcriticiseseffectivelytheerrors，inconsistencies，andexaggerationsofhispredecessors。Butin
　　characterisingandvindicatingthehistoricalmethodhehasaddednothingtoComte。Asecondeditionofhistreatisewas
　　publishedin1883，andinthishemakesthesingularconfessionthat，whenhewrotein1852，thePhilosophiePositive，the
　　sixvolumesofwhichhadappearedfrom1830to1842，wasentirelyunknowntohimand，headds，probablytoallGerman
　　economists。Thisisnottothecreditoftheiropen—mindednessorliteraryvigilance，ifwerememberthatMillwasalreadyin
　　correspondencewithComtein1841，andthathiseulogisticnoticeofhimintheLogicappearedin1843。When，however，
　　KniesatalaterperiodexaminedComte’swork，hewas，hetellsus，surprisedatfindinginitsomanyanticipationsof，or
　　"parallelisms"with，hisownconclusions。Andwellhemight;forallthatisreallyvaluableinhismethodologyistobefound
　　inComte，appliedonalargerscale，anddesignedwiththebroadandcommandingpowerwhichmarksthediimajoresof
　　philosophy。
　　TherearetwopointswhichseemtobeopentocriticisminthepositiontakenbysomeGermaneconomistsofthehistorical
　　school。
　　1。Kniesandsomeotherwriters，inmaintainingtheprincipleofrelativityineconomictheory，appearnottopreservethedue
　　balanceinoneparticular。Thetwoformsofabsolutismindoctrine，cosmopolitanismandwhatKniescallsperpetualism，he
　　seemstoplaceonexactlythesamefooting;inotherwords，heconsiderstheerrorofoverlookingvarietiesoflocal
　　circumstancesandnationalitytobequiteasseriousasthatofneglectingdifferencesinthestageofhistoricaldevelopment。
　　Butthisiscertainlynotso。IneverybranchofSociologythelatterismuchthegravererror，vitiatingradically，whereveritis
　　found，thewholeofourinvestigations。Ifweignorethefact，ormistakethedirection，ofthesocialmovement，wearewrong
　　inthemostfundamentalpointofallapoint，too，whichisinvolvedineveryquestion。Butthevariationsdependingon
　　differenceofrace，asaffectingbodilyandmentalendowment，orondiversityofexternalsituation，aresecondaryphenomena
　　only;theymustbepostponedinstudyingthegeneraltheoryofsocialdevelopment，andtakenintoaccountafterwardswhen
　　wecometoexaminethemodificationsinthecharacterofthedevelopmentarisingoutofpeculiarconditions。And，though
　　thephysicalnatureofaterritoryisaconditionwhichislikelytooperatewithspecialforceoneconomicphenomena，itis
　　ratheronthetechnicalformsandcomparativeextensionoftheseveralbranchesofindustrythatitwillactthanonthesocial
　　conductofeachbranch，ortheco—ordinationandrelativeactionofall，whichlatterarethepropersubjectsoftheinquiriesof
　　theeconomist。
　　2。Somemembersoftheschoolappear，intheiranxietytoasserttherelativityofthescience，tofallintotheerrorofdenying
　　economiclawsaltogether;theyareatleastunwillingtospeakof"naturallaws"inrelationtotheeconomicworld。Froma
　　tooexclusiveconsiderationoflawintheinorganicsphere，theyregardthisphraseologyasbindingthemtothenotionof
　　fixityandofaninvariablesystemofpracticaleconomy。But，ifweturnourattentionrathertotheorganicsciences，which
　　aremorekindredtothesocial，weshallseethattheterm"naturallaw"carrieswithitnosuchimplication。Aswehavemore
　　thanonceindicated，anessentialpartoftheideaoflifeisthatofdevelopment，inotherwords，of"orderedchange。"Andthat
　　suchadevelopmenttakesplaceintheconstitutionandworkingofsocietyinallitselementsisafactwhichcannotbe
　　doubted，andwhichthesewritersthemselves，emphaticallyassert。Thatthereexistbetweentheseveralsocialelementssuch
　　relationsasmakethechangeofoneelementinvolveordeterminethechangeofanotherisequallyplain;andwhythename
　　ofnaturallawsshouldbedeniedtosuchconstantrelationsofcoexistenceandsuccessionitisnoteasytosee。Theselaws，
　　beinguniversal，admitoftheconstructionofanabstracttheoryofeconomicdevelopment;whilstapartoftheGerman
　　historicalschooltendstosubstituteforsuchatheoryameredescriptionofdifferentnationaleconomies，introducing
　　prematurelyaswehavepointedouttheactionofspecialterritorialorethnologicalconditions，insteadofreservingthisas
　　thegroundoflatermodifications，inconcretecases，oftheprimarygenerallawsdeducedfromastudyofthecommon
　　humanevolution。
　　Tothethreewritersabovenamed，Roscher，Hildebrand，andKnies，thefoundationoftheGermanhistoricalschoolof
　　politicaleconomybelongs。ItdoesnotappearthatRoscherinhisownsubsequentlabourshasbeenmuchundertheinfluence
　　ofthemethodwhichhehasinsomanyplacesadmirablycharacterised。InhisSystemderVolkswirthschaft（vol。i。，GrundlagenderNationaleökonomie，1854;23rded。，1900;Eng。transi。byJ。J。Lalor，1878;vol。ii。，N。O。desAckerbaues，
　　1860;13thed。，1903;vol。iii。，N。O。desHandelsundGewerbfleisses，7thed。，1887）thedogmaticandthehistoricalmatter
　　areratherjuxtaposedthanvitallycombined。Itistruethathehasmostusefullyappliedhisvastlearningtospecialhistorical
　　studies，inrelationespeciallytotheprogressofthescienceitself。HistreatiseUeberdasVerhdltnissderNationalökonomie
　　zumclassischenAlterthume（1849），hisZurGeschichtederEnglischenVoikswirthschaftslehre（18512），and，aboveall，
　　thatmarvellousmonumentoferuditionandindustry，hisGesehichiederNational—OekonomikinDeutschland（1874），to
　　whichheissaidtohavedevotedfifteenyearsofstudy，areamongthemostvaluableextantworksofthiskind，thoughthe
　　lastbyitsaccumulationofdetailisunfittedforgeneralstudyoutsideofGermanyitself。Severalinterestinganduseful
　　monographsarecollectedinhisAnsichtenderVolkswirthschaftvomgeschichtlichenStandpunkte（1861，3ded。，1878）。His
　　systematictreatise，too，abovereferredto，aboundsinhistoricalnoticesoftheriseanddevelopmentoftheseveraldoctrines
　　ofthescience。Butitcannotbeallegedthathehasdonemuchtowardsthetransformationofpoliticaleconomywhichhis
　　earliestlaboursseemedtoannounce;andCossaappearstoberightinsayingthathisdogmaticworkhasnoteffectedany
　　substantialmodificationoftheprinciplesofHermannandRau。
　　Thehistoricalmethodhasexhibiteditsessentialfeaturesmorefullyinthehandsoftheyoungergenerationofscientific
　　economistsinGermany，amongstwhommaybereckonedLujoBrentano，AdolfHeld，ErwinNasse，GustavSchmoller，H。
　　Rösler，AlbertSchäffle，HansvonScheel，GustavSchönberg，andAdolfWagner。Besidesthegeneralprincipleofan
　　historicaltreatmentofthescience，theleadingideaswhichhavebeenmoststronglyinsistedonbythisschoolarethe
　　following。I。Thenecessityofaccentuatingthemoralelementineconomicstudy。Thisconsiderationhasbeenurgedwith
　　specialemphasisbySchmollerinhisGrundiragenderRechtesundderMoral（1875）andbySchäffleinhisDas
　　gesellschaftlicheSystemdermenschlichenWirthschaft（1861，3ded。，1873）。G。Kries（d。1858）appearsalsotohave
　　handledthesubjectwellinareviewofJ。S。Mill。Accordingtothemostadvancedorgansoftheschool，threeprinciplesof
　　organizationareatworkinpracticaleconomy;and，correspondingwiththese，therearethreedifferentsystemsorspheresof
　　activity。Thelatterare（1）privateeconomy;（2）thecompulsorypubliceconomy;（3）the"caritative"sphere。Inthefirstalone
　　personalinterestpredominates;inthesecondthegeneralinterestofthesociety;inthethirdthebenevolentimpulses。Evenin
　　thefirst，however，theactionofprivateinterestscannotbeunlimited;nottospeakhereoftheinterventionofthepublic
　　power，theexcessesandabusesofthefundamentalprincipleinthisdepartmentmustbecheckedandcontrolledbyan
　　economicmorality，whichcanneverbeleftoutofaccountintheoryanymorethaninpracticalapplications。Inthethird
　　regionabovenamed，moralinfluencesareofcoursesupreme。II。Thecloserelationwhichnecessarilyexistsbetween
　　economicsandjurisprudence。ThishasbeenbroughtoutbyL。vonSteinandH。Rösler，butismostsystematically
　　establishedbyWagnerwhois，withoutdoubt，oneofthemosteminentoflivingGermaneconomistsespeciallyinhisGrundlegung，nowformingpartofthecomprehensiveLehrbuchderpolitischenOekonomiepublishedbyhimandProfessor
　　Nassejointly。Thedoctrineofthejusnature，onwhichthephysiocrats，aswehaveseen，rearedtheireconomicstructure，
　　haslostitsholdonbelief，andtheoldaprioriandabsoluteconceptionsofpersonalfreedomandpropertyhavegivenway
　　alongwithit。Itisseenthattheeconomicpositionoftheindividual，insteadofdependingmerelyonso—callednaturalrights
　　orevenonhisnaturalpowers，isconditionedbythecontemporaryjuristicsystem，whichisitselfanhistoricalproduct。The
　　above—namedconceptions，therefore，halfeconomichalfjuristic，offreedomandpropertyrequireafreshexamination。Itis
　　principallyfromthispointofviewthatWagnerapproacheseconomicstudies。Thepoint，ashesays，onwhichallturnsisthe
　　oldquestionoftherelationoftheindividualtothecommunity。Whoeverwiththeolderjuristicandpoliticalphilosophyand
　　nationaleconomyplacestheindividualinthecentrecomesnecessarilytotheuntenableresultswhich，intheeconomicfield，
　　thephysiocraticandSmithianschooloffreecompetitionhassetup。Wagneronthecontraryinvestigates，beforeanything
　　else，theconditionsoftheeconomiclifeofthecommunity，and，insubordinationtothis，determinesthesphereofthe
　　economicfreedomoftheindividual。III。AdifferentconceptionofthefunctionsoftheStatefromthatentertainedbythe
　　schoolofSmith。ThelatterschoolhasingeneralfollowedtheviewofRousseauandKantthatthesoleofficeofthestateis
　　theprotectionofthemembersofthecommunityfromviolenceandfraud。Thisdoctrine，whichwasinharmonywiththoseof
　　thejusnaturaeandthesocialcontract，wastemporarilyusefulforthedemolitionoftheoldeconomicsystemwithits
　　complicatedapparatusoffettersandrestrictions。Butitcouldnotstandagainstarationalhistoricalcriticism，andstillless
　　againstthegrowingpracticaldemandsofmoderncivilization。Infact，theabolitionoftheimpoliticanddiscreditedsystemof
　　EuropeanGovernments，bybringingtothesurfacetheevilsarisingfromunlimitedcompetition，irresistiblydemonstratedthe
　　necessityofpublicactionaccordingtonewandmoreenlightenedmethods。TheGermanhistoricalschoolrecognizesthe
　　Stateasnotmerelyaninstitutionforthemaintenanceoforder，butastheorganofthenationforallendswhichcannotbe
　　adequatelyeffectedbyvoluntaryindividualeffort。Wheneversocialaimscanbeattainedonlyormostadvantageously
　　throughitsaction，thatactionisjustified。（5）Thecasesinwhichitcanproperlyinterferemustbedeterminedseparatelyon
　　theirownmeritsandinrelationtothestageofnationaldevelopment。Itoughtcertainlytopromoteintellectualandaesthetic
　　culture。Itoughttoenforceprovisionsforpublichealthandregulationsfortheproperconductofproductionandtransport。
　　Itoughttoprotecttheweakermembersofsociety，especiallywomen，children，theaged，andthedestitute，atleastinthe
　　absenceoffamilymaintenanceandguardianship。Itoughttosecurethelaboureragainsttheworstconsequencesofpersonal
　　injurynotduetohisownnegligence，toassistthroughlegalrecognitionandsupervisiontheeffortsoftheworkingclasses
　　forjointnolessthanindividualself—help，andtoguaranteethesafetyoftheirearnings，whenintrustedtoitscare。
　　Aspecialinfluencewhichhasworkedonthismorerecentgroupisthatoftheoreticsocialism;weshallseehereafterthat
　　socialismasapartyorganizationhasalsoaffectedtheirpracticalpolitics。WithsuchwritersasSt。Simon，Fourier，and
　　Proudhon，Lassalle，Marx，Engels，Marlo，andRodhertus，wedonotdealinthepresenttreatise;butwemustrecognize
　　themashavingpowerfullystimulatedtheyoungerGermaneconomists（inthemorelimitedsenseofthislastword）。They
　　haveevenmodifiedthescientificconclusionsofthelatter，principallythroughcriticismoftheso—calledorthodoxsystem。
　　SchäffleandWagnermaybeespeciallynamedashavinggivenalargespaceandarespectfulattentiontotheirarguments。In
　　particular，theimportantconsideration，towhichwehavealreadyreferred，thattheeconomicpositionoftheindividual
　　dependsontheexistinglegalsystem，andnotablyontheexistingorganizationofproperty，wasfirstinsistedonbythe
　　socialists。Theyhadalsopointedoutthatthepresentinstitutionsofsocietyinrelationtoproperty，inheritance，contract，and
　　thelike，are（touseLassalle’sphrase）"historicalcategorieswhichhavechanged，andaresubjecttofurtherchange，"whilstin
　　theorthodoxeconomytheyaregenerallyassumedasafixedorderofthingsonthebasisofwhichtheindividualcreateshis
　　ownposition。J。S。Mill，aswehaveseen，calledattentiontothefactofthedistributionofwealthdepending，unlikeits
　　production，notonnaturallawsalone，butontheordinancesofsociety，butitissomeoftheGermaneconomistsofthe
　　youngerhistoricalschoolwhohavemoststronglyemphasisedthisview。Torectifyandcompletetheconception，however，
　　wemustbearinmindthatthoseordinancesthemselvesarenotarbitrarilychangeable，butareconditionedbythestageof
　　generalsocialdevelopment。
　　IneconomicpoliticsthesewritershavetakenupapositionbetweentheGermanfree—trade（or，asitissometimeswith
　　questionableproprietycalled，theManchester）partyandthedemocraticsocialists。Thelatterinvoketheomnipotenceofthe
　　Statetotransformradicallyandimmediatelythepresenteconomicconstitutionofsocietyintheinterestoftheproletariate。
　　Thefree—tradersseektominimisestateactionforanyendexceptthatofmaintainingpublicorder，andsecuringthesafety
　　andfreedomoftheindividual。Themembersoftheschoolofwhichwearenowspeaking，wheninterveninginthediscussion
　　ofpracticalquestions，haveoccupiedanintermediatestandpoint。Theyareopposedaliketosocialrevolutionandtorigidlaisserfaire。Whilstrejectingthesocialisticprogramme，theycallfortheinterventionoftheStateinaccordancewiththe
　　theoreticprinciplesalreadymentioned，forthepurposeofmitigatingthepressureofthemodernindustrialsystemonits
　　weakermembers，andextendingingreatermeasuretotheworkingclassesthebenefitsofadvancingcivilization。Schäfflein
　　hisCapitalismusundSocialismus（1870;nowabsorbedintoalargerwork），WagnerinhisRedeüberdiesocialeFrage（1871），andSchanberginhisArbeitsämter:eineAulgabedesdeutschenReichs（1871）advocatedthispolicyinrelationto
　　thequestionofthelabourer。Theseexpressionsofopinion，withwhichmostoftheGermanprofessorsofpoliticaleconomy
　　sympathised，wereviolentlyassailedbytheorgansofthefree—tradeparty，whofoundinthem"anewformofsocialism。"Out
　　ofthisarosealivelycontroversy;andthenecessityofacloserunionandapracticalpoliticalorganizationbeingfeltamongst
　　thepartisansofthenewdirection，acongresswasheldatEisenachinOctober1872，fortheconsiderationof"thesocial
　　question。"ItwasattendedbyalmostalltheprofessorsofeconomicscienceintheGermanuniversities，byrepresentativesof
　　theseveralpoliticalparties，byleadersoftheworkingmen，andbysomeofthelargecapitalists。Atthismeetingthe
　　principlesaboveexplainedwereformulated。Thosewhoadoptedthemobtainedfromtheiropponentstheappellationof
　　"Katheder—Socialisten，"orsocialistsofthe（professorial）chair，"anicknameinventedbyH。B。Oppenheim，andwhichthose
　　towhomitwasappliedwerenotunwillingtoaccept。Since1873thisgrouphasbeenunitedinthe"Vereinfür
　　Social—politik，"inwhich，asthecontroversybecamemitigated，free—tradersalsohavetakenpart。WithintheVereinadivision
　　hasshownitself。Theleftwinghasfavouredasystematicgradualmodificationofthelawofpropertyinsuchadirectionas
　　wouldtendtothefulfilmentofthesocialisticaspirations，sofarasthesearelegitimate，whilstthemajorityadvocatereform
　　throughstateactiononthebasisofexistingjuralinstitutions。Schäfflegoessofarastomaintainthatthepresent
　　"capitalistic"regimewillbereplacedbyasocialisticorganization;but，likeJ。S。Mill，headjournsthischangetoamoreor
　　lessremotefuture，andexpectsitastheresultofanaturaldevelopment，orprocessof"socialselection;"（6）herepudiatesany
　　immediateorviolentrevolution，andrejectsanysystemoflifewhichwouldsetup"abstractequality"againsttheclaimsof
　　individualserviceandmerit。
　　ThefurthertheinvestigationsoftheGermanhistoricalschoolhavebeencarried，intheseverallinesofinquiryithasopened，
　　themoreclearlyithascometolightthattheonethingneedfulisnotmerelyareformofpoliticaleconomy，butitsfusionina
　　completescienceofsociety。ThisistheviewlongsinceinsistedonbyAugusteComte;anditsjustnessisdailybecoming
　　moreapparent。ThebesteconomistsofGermanynowtendstronglyinthisdirection。Schäffle（18311903），whowaslargely
　　undertheinfluenceofComteandHerbertSpencer，actuallyattemptedtheenterpriseofwideningeconomicintosocial
　　studies。Inhismostimportantwork，whichhadbeenpreparedbypreviouspublications，BauundLebendessocialen
　　Körpers（187578;newed。，1896），heproposestogiveacomprehensiveplanananatomy，physiology，andpsychologyofhumansociety。Heconsiderssocialprocessesasanalogoustothoseoforganic
　　bodies;and，soundandsuggestiveastheideaofthisanalogy，alreadyusedbyComte，undoubtedlyis，hecarriesit，perhaps，
　　toanunduedegreeofdetailandelaboration。Thesameconceptionisadopted，andpresentedinaveryexaggeratedform，by
　　P。vonLilienfeldinhisGedankenüberdieSocialzeissenschaftderZukunft（187381）。Atendencytothefusionofeconomic
　　scienceinSociologyisalsofoundinAdolphSamter’sSozial—lehre（1875）thoughtheeconomicaspectofsocietyisthere
　　speciallystudiedandinSchmoller’salreadymentionedtreatiseUebereinigeGrundfragen;andthenecessityofsucha
　　transformationisenergeticallyassertedbyH。vonScheelintheprefacetohisGermanversion（1879）ofanEnglishtract（7）OnthepresentPositionandProspectsofPoliticalEconomy。
　　Thename"Realistic，"whichhassometimesbeengiventothehistoricalschool，especiallyinitsmorerecentform，appears
　　tobeinjudiciouslychosen。Itisintendedtomarkthecontrastwiththe"abstract"complexionoftheorthodoxeconomics。
　　Buttheerroroftheseeconomicslies，notintheuse，butintheabuseofabstraction。Allscienceimpliesabstraction，seeking，
　　asitdoes，forunityinvariety;thequestionineverybranchisastotherightconstitutionoftlleabstracttheoryinrelationto
　　theconcretefacts。Noristhenewschoolquitecorrectlydistinguishedas"inductive。"Deductiondoubtlessunduly
　　preponderatesintheinvestigationsoftheoldereconomists;butitmustberememberedthatitisalegitimateprocess，whenit
　　setsout，notfromaprioriassumptions，butfromprovedgeneralisations。Andtheappropriatemethodofeconomics，asof
　　allsociology，isnotsomuchinductionasthespecialisedformofinductionknownascomparison，especiallythecomparative
　　studyof"socialseries"（touseMill’sphrase），whichisproperlydesignatedasthe"historical"method。Ifthedenominations
　　herecriticisedwereallowedtoprevail，therewouldbeadangeroftheschoolassuminganunscientificcharacter。Itmight
　　occupyitselftooexclusivelywithstatisticalinquiry，andforgetinthedetailedexaminationofparticularprovincesof
　　economiclifethenecessityoflargephilosophicideasandofasystematicco—ordinationofprinciples。Solongaseconomics
　　remainaseparatebranchofstudy，anduntiltheyareabsorbedintoSociology，thethinkerswhofollowthenewdirectionwill
　　dowiselyinretainingtheiroriginaldesignationofthehistoricalschool。
　　ThemembersofthisandtheotherGermanschoolshaveproducedmanyvaluableworksbesidesthosewhichtherehasbeen
　　occasiontomentionabove。Amplenoticesoftheircontributionstotheseveralbranchesofthescience（includingits
　　applications）willbefounddispersedthroughWagnerandNasse’sLehrbuchandthecomprehensiveHandbucheditedby
　　Schönberg。Thefollowinglist，whichdoesnotpretendtoapproachtocompleteness，isgivenforthepurposeofdirectingthe
　　studenttoacertainnumberofbookswhichoughtnottobeoverlookedinthestudyofthesubjectstowhichthey
　　respectivelyrefer:——
　　Knies，DieEisenbahnenundihreWirkungen（1853），DerTelegraph（1857），GeldundCredit（18737679）;Rösler，Zur
　　KritikderLekrevomArbeitslohn（1861）;Schmoller，ZurGeschichteaerdeutschenKleingewerbeim19Jahrh。（1870）;
　　Schäffle，TheoriederausschliessendenAbsatzverhaltnisse（1867），Quintessenzdessocialismus（6thed。，1878），Grundsatze
　　derSteuerpolitik（1880）Nasse，MittelalterlicheFeldgemeinschaftinEngland（1869）;Brentano，OntheHistoryand
　　DevelopmentofGilds，prefixedtoToulminSmith’sEnglishGilds（1870），DieArbeitergildenderGegenwart（187172），DasArbeitsverhaltnissgemassdemheutigenRecht（1877），DieArbeitsversicherunggetnassderheutigen
　　Wirthschaftsordnung（1879），DerArbeitsversicherungszwang（1884），DieklassischeNationalokonomie（1888）;Held（born
　　1844，accidentallydrownedintheLakeofThun，1880），DieEinkommensteuer（1872），DiedeutscheArbeiterpresseder
　　Gegenwart（1873），Sozialismus，SozialdemokratieundSozialpolitik（1878），GrundrissfurVorlesungenuber
　　Nationalokonomie（2ded。，1878）;ZweiBucherzursocialenGeschichteEnglands（posthumouslypublished，1881）;Von
　　Scheel（born1839），DieTheoriedersocialenFrage（1871），UnseresocialpolitischenParteien（1878）;VonBöhm
　　Bawerk，KapitalundKapitalzinstheorien（188489）。TothesemaybeaddedL。vonStein，DieVerwaltungslehre（187679），LehrbuchderFinanzwissenschaft（4thed。，1878）。E。DuhringistheablestofthefewGermanfollowersofCarey;wehave
　　alreadymentioned（Bibl。Note）hisHistoryoftheScience。TotheRussianGermanschoolbelongstheworkofT。von
　　Bernhardi，whichiswrittenfromthehistoricalpointofview，VersucheinerKritikderGrundewelehefurgrossesund
　　kleinesGrundeigenthumangefuhrtwerden（1848）。ThefreetradeschoolofGermanyisrecognizedashavingrenderedgreat
　　practicalservicesinthatcountry，especiallybyitssystematicwarfareagainstantiquatedprivilegesandrestrictions。Cobden
　　hasfurnishedthemodelofitspoliticalaction，whilst，onthesideoftheory，itisfoundedchieflyonSayandBastiat。The
　　membersofthisschoolwhosenameshavebeenmostfrequentlyheardbytheEnglishpublicarethoseofJ。PrinceSmith（d。
　　1874），whomayberegardedashavingbeenitshead;H。vonTreitschke，authorofDerSocialismusundseineGonner，1875
　　（directedagainsttheKathederSocialisten）V。Böhmert，whohasadvocatedtheparticipationofworkmeninprofits（Die
　　Gewinnbetheiligung，1878）;A。Emminghaus，authorofDasArmenweseninEuropaischenStaaten，1870，partofwhichhas
　　beentranslatedinE。B。Eastwick’sPoorReliefinDifferentPartsofEurope，1873;andJ。H。SchultzeDelitzsch，wellknown
　　asthefounderoftheGermanpopularbanks，andastrenuoussupporterofthesystemof"co—operation。"Thesocialist
　　writers，ashasbeenalreadymentioned，arenotincludedinthepresenthistoricalsurvey，nordoweingeneralnoticewritings
　　oftheeconomists（properlysocalled）havingrelationtothehistoryofsocialismorthecontroversywithit。
　　ThemovementwhichcreatedthenewschoolinGermany，withthedevelopmentswhichhavegrownoutofit，havewithout
　　doubtgiventothatcountryatthepresenttimetheprimacyineconomicstudies。Germaninfluencehasbeenfeltinthe
　　modificationofopinioninothercountriesmoststrongly，perhaps，inItaly，andleastsoinFrance。InEnglandithasbeen
　　steadilymakingway，thoughretardedbytheinsularindifferencetothecurrentsofforeignthoughtwhichhaseminently
　　markedourdominantschool。Alongsideoftheinfluencethusexerted，ageneraldistasteforthe"orthodox"systemhasbeen
　　spontaneouslygrowing，partlyfromasuspicionthatitsmethodwasunsound，partlyfromaprofounddissatisfactionwiththe
　　practiceitinspired，andthedetectedhollownessofthepolicyofmerelaisserfaire。Henceeverywhereamodeofthinking
　　andaspeciesofresearchhaveshownthemselves，andcomeintofavour，whichareinharmonywiththesystematic
　　conceptionsofthehistoricaleconomists。Thusadualismhasestablisheditselfintheeconomicworld，ayoungerschool
　　advancingtowardspredominance，whilsttheoldschoolstilldefendsitsposition，thoughitsadherentstendmoreandmoreto
　　modifytheirattitudeandtoadmitthevalueofthenewlights。