Theessenceofthetheoryisthatrent，beingthepricepaidbythecultivatortotheowneroflandfortheuseofitsproductive
　　powers，isequaltotheexcessoithepriceoftheproduceotthelandoverthecostofproductiononthatland。Withthe
　　increaseofpopulation，andthereforeofdemandforfood，inferiorsoilswillbetakenintocultivation;andthepriceofthe
　　entiresupplynecessaryforthecommunitywillberegulatedbythecostofproductionofthatportionofthesupplywhichis
　　producedatthegreatestexpense。Butforthelandwhichwillbarelyrepaythecostofcultivationnorentwillbepaid。Hence
　　therentofanyqualityoflandwillbeequaltothedifferencebetweenthecostofproductiononthatlandandthecostof
　　productionofthatproducewhichisraisedatthegreatestexpense。
　　Thedoctrineisperhapsmosteasilyapprehendedbymeansofthesuppositionheremadeofthecoexistenceinacountryofa
　　seriesofsoilsofdifferentdegreesoffertilitywhicharesuccessivelytakenintocultivationaspopulationincreases。Butit
　　wouldbeanerrortobelieve，thoughRicardosometimesseemstoimplyit，thatsuchdifferenceisanecessaryconditionof
　　theexistenceofrent。Ifallthelandofacountrywereofequalfertility，stillifitwereappropriated，andifthepriceoithe
　　produceweremorethananequivalentforthelabourandcapitalappliedtoitsproduction，rentwouldbepaid。This
　　imaginarycase，however，afterusingittoclearourconceptions，wemayiorthefutureleaveoutofaccount。
　　Thepriceofproducebeing，aswehavesaid，regulatedbythecostofproductionofthatwhichpaysnorent，itisevidentthat
　　"cornisnothighbecausearentispaid，butarentispaidbecausecornishigh，"andthat"noreductionwouldtakeplacein
　　thepriceofcornalthoughlandlordsshouldforegothewholeoftheirrent。"Rentis，infact，nodeterminingelementofprice;
　　itispaid，indeed，outoitheprice，butthepricewouldbethesameifnorentwerepaid，andthewholepricewereretainedby
　　thecultivator。
　　IthasoftenbeendoubtedwhetherornotAdamSmithheldthistheoryofrent。Sometimesheuseslanguagewhichseemsto
　　implyit，andstatesprepositionswhich，ifdeveloped，wouldinfalliblyleadtoit。Thushesays，inapassagealreadyquoted，
　　"Suchpartsonlyoftheproduceoflandcancommonlybebroughttomarketofwhichtheordinarypriceissufficientto
　　replacethestockwhichmustbeemployedinbringingthemthither，togetherwithitsordinaryprofits。Iftheordinarypriceis
　　morethanthis，thesurpluspartofitwillnaturallygototherentofland。Ifitisnotmore，thoughthecommoditycanbe
　　broughttomarket，itcanaffordnorenttothelandlord。Whetherthepriceisorisnotmoredependsonthedemand。"Again，
　　inSmith’sapplicationoftheseconsiderationstomines，"thewholeprincipleofrent，"Ricardotellsus，"isadmirablyand
　　perspicuouslyexplained。"Buthehadformedtheopinionthatthereisinfactnolandwhichdoesnotaffordarenttothe
　　landlord;and，strangely，heseemstohaveseenthatthisappearancemightarisefromtheaggregationintoaneconomic
　　wholeofparcelsoflandwhichcanandotherswhichcannotpayrent。Thetruth，indeed，is，thatthefact，ifitwereafact，that
　　allthelandinacountrypaysrentwouldbeirrelevantasanargumentagainsttheAndersoniantheory，foritisthesamething
　　insubstanceiftherebeanycapitalemployedonlandalreadycultivatedwhichyieldsareturnnomorethanequaltoordinary
　　profits。Suchlast—employedcapitalcannotaffordrentattheexistingrateofprofit，unlessthepriceofproduceshouldrise。
　　ThebeliefwhichsomehaveentertainedthatSmith，notwithstandingsomevagueorinaccurateexpressions，reallyheldthe
　　Andersoniandoctrine，canscarcelybemaintainedwhenwerememberthatHume，writingtohimafterhavingreadforthe
　　firsttimetheWealthofNations，whilstexpressinggeneralagreementwithhisopinions，said（apparentlywithreferenceto
　　Bk。I，chap。vii），"Icannotthinkthattherentoffarmsmakesanypartofthepriceoftheproduce，butthatthepriceis
　　determinedaltogetherbythequantityandthedemand。"Itisfurthernoteworthythatastatementofthetheoryofrentiseven
　　inthesamevolume，publishedin1777，whichcontainsAnderson’spolemicagainstSmith’sobjectionstoabountyonthe
　　exportationofcorn;thisvolumecanhardlyhaveescapedSmith’snotice，yetneitherbyitscontentsnorbyHume’sletterwas
　　heledtomodifywhathehadsaidinhisfirsteditiononthesubjectofrent。
　　Itmustberememberedthatnotmerelytheunequalfertilitiesofdifferentsoilswilldeterminedifferencesofrent;themoreor
　　lessadvantageoussituationofafarminrelationtomarkets，andthereforetoroadsandrailways，willhaveasimilareffect。
　　Comparativelownessofthecostoitransitwillenabletheproducetobebroughttomarketatasmallerexpense，andwill
　　thusincreasethesurpluswhichconstitutesrent。ThisconsiderationisindicatedbyRicardo，thoughhedoesnotgiveit
　　prominence，butdwellsmainlyonthecomparativeproductivenessofsoils。
　　RentisdefinedbyRicardoasthepricepaidfortheuseof"theoriginalandindestructiblepowersofthesoil。"Hethus
　　differentiatesrent，asheusestheterm，fromwhatispopularlydesignatedbytheword;and，whenitistobetakeninhis
　　sense，itisoftenqualifiedasthe，"true"or"economic"rent。Partofwhatispaidtothelandlordisoftenreallyprofitonhis
　　expenditureinpreparingthefarmforcultivationbythetenant。Butitistobeborneinmindthatwhereversuch
　　improvementsare"amalgamatedwiththeland，"and"addpermanentlytoitsproductivepowers，"thereturnforthemfollows
　　thelaws，notofprofit，butofrent。Henceitbecomesdifficult，ifnotimpossible，inpracticetodiscriminatewithanydegree
　　ofaccuracytheamountreceivedbythelandlord"fortheuseoftheoriginalpowersofthesoil"fromtheamountreceivedby
　　himasremunerationforhisimprovementsorthosemadebyhispredecessors。Thesehaveraisedthefarm，asaninstrument
　　forproducingfood，fromoneclassofproductivenesstoahigher，andthecaseisthesameasifnaturehadoriginallyplaced
　　thelandinquestioninthathigherclass。
　　Smithhadtreateditasthepeculiarprivilegeofagriculture，ascomparedwithotherformsofproduction，thatinit"nature
　　laboursalongwithman，"andtherefore，whilsttheworkmeninmanufacturesoccasionthereproductionmerelyoithecapital
　　whichemploysthemwithitsowner’sprofits，theagriculturallaboureroccasionsthereproduction，notonlyoftheemployer’s
　　capitalwithprofits，butalsooftherentofthelandlord。Thislastheviewedasthefreegiftofnaturewhichremained"after
　　deductingorcompensatingeverythingwhichcanberegardedastheworkofman。"Ricardojustlyobservesinreplythat
　　"thereisnotamanufacturewhichcanbementionedinwhichnaturedoenotgiveherassistancetoman。"Hethengoesonto
　　quotefromBuchanantheremarkthat"thenotionofagricultureyieldingaproduceandarentinconsequence，because
　　natureconcurswithindustryintheprocessofcultivation，isamerefancy。Itisnotfromtheproduce，butfromthepriceat
　　whichtheproduceissold，thattherentisderived;andthispriceisgot，notbecausenatureassistsintheproduction，but
　　becauseitisthepricewhichsuitstheconsumptiontothesupply。"（43）Thereisnogaintothesocietyatlargefromtheriseof
　　rent;itisadvantageoustothelandlordsalone，andtheirinterestsarethuspermanentlyinoppositiontothoseofallother
　　classes。Theriseofrentmayberetarded，orprevented，oreventemporarilychangedtoafall，byagriculturalimprovements，
　　suchastheintroductionofnewmanuresorofmachinesorofabetterorganisationoflabour（thoughthereisnotsomuch
　　roomforthislastasinotherbranchesofproduction），ortheopeningofnewsourcesofsupplyinforeigncountries;butthe
　　tendencytoariseisconstantsolongasthepopulationincreases。
　　ThegreatimportanceofthetheoryofrentinRicardo’ssystemarisesfromthefactthathemakesthegeneraleconomic
　　conditionofthesocietytodependaltogetheronthepositioninwhichagriculturalexploitationstands。Thiswillbeseenfrom
　　thefollowingstatementofhistheoryofwagesandprofits。Theproduceofeveryexpenditureoflabourandcapitalbeing
　　dividedbetweenthelabourerandthecapitalist，inproportionasoneobtainsmoretheother，willnecessarilyobtainless。The
　　productivenessoflabourbeinggiven，nothingcandiminishprofitbutariseofwagesorincreaseitbutafallofwages。Now
　　thepriceoflabour，beingthesameasitscostofproduction，isdeterminedbythepriceofthecommoditiesnecessaryforthe
　　supportofthelabourer。Thepriceofsuchmanufacturedarticlesasherequireshasaconstanttendencytofall，principallyby
　　reasonoftheprogressiveapplicationofthedivisionoflabourtotheirproduction。Butthecostofhismaintenanceessentially
　　depends，notonthepriceofthosearticles，butonthatofhisfood;and，astheproductionoffoodwillintheprogressof
　　societyandofpopulationrequirethesacrificeofmoreandmorelabour，itspricewillrise;moneywageswillconsequently
　　rise，andwiththeriseofwagesprofitswillfall。Thusitistothenecessarygradualdescenttoinferiorsoils，orlessproductive
　　expenditureonthesamesoil，thatthedecreaseintherateofprofitwhichhashistoricallytakenplaceistobeattributed
　　（Smithascribedthisdecreasetothecompetitionofcapitalists，thoughinoneplace，BookI，chap。ix，（44）hehadaglimpseof
　　theRicardianview）。Thisgravitationofprofitstowardsaminimumishappilycheckedattimesbyimprovementsofthe
　　machineryemployedintheproductionofnecessaries，andespeciallybysuchdiscoveriesinagricultureandothercausesas
　　reducethecostoftheprimenecessaryofthelabourer;buthereagainthetendencyisconstant。Whilstthecapitalistthus
　　loses，thelabourerdoesnotgain;hisincreasedmoneywagesonlyenablehimtopaytheincreasedpriceofhisnecessaries，
　　ofwhichhewillhavenogreaterandprobablyalesssharethanhehadbefore。Infact，thelabourercanneverforany
　　considerabletimeearnmorethanwhatisrequiredtoenabletheclasstosubsistinsuchadegreeofcomfortascustomhas
　　madeindispensabletothem，andtoperpetuatetheirracewithouteitherincreaseordiminution。Thatisthe"natural"priceof
　　labour;andifthemarketratetemporarilyrisesaboveitpopulationwillbestimulated，andtherateofwageswillagainfall。
　　Thuswhilstrenthasaconstanttendencytoriseandprofittofall，theriseorfallofwageswilldependontherateofincrease
　　oftheworkingclasses。FortheimprovementoftheirconditionRicardothushastofallbackontheMalthusianremedy，of
　　theeffectiveapplicationofwhichhedoesnot，however，seemtohavemuchexpectation。Thesecuritiesagainsta
　　superabundantpopulationtowhichhepointsarethegradualabolitionofthepoor—laws——fortheiramendmentwouldnot
　　contenthim——andthedevelopmentamongsttheworkingclassesofatasteforgreatercomfortsandenjoyments。
　　Itwillbeseenthatthesocialistshavesomewhatexaggeratedinannouncing，asRicardo’s"ironlaw"ofwages，theirabsolute
　　identitywiththeamountnecessarytosustaintheexistenceofthelabourerandenablehimtocontinuetherace。He
　　recognizestheinfluenceofa"standardofliving"aslimitingtheincreaseofthenumbersoftheworkingclasses，andso
　　keepingtheirwagesabovethelowestpoint。Buthealsoholdsthat，inlong—settledcountries，intheordinarycourseof
　　humanaffairs，andintheabsenceofspecialeffortsrestrictingthegrowthofpopulation，theconditionofthelabourerwill
　　declineassurely，andfromthesamecauses，asthatofthelandlordwillbeimproved。
　　IfweareaskedwhetherthisdoctrineofrentandtheconsequenceswhichRicardodeducedfromit，aretrue，wemust
　　answerthattheyarehypotheticallytrueinthemostadvancedindustrialcommunities，andthereonly（thoughtheyhavebeen
　　rashlyappliedtothecasesofIndiaandIreland），butthateveninthosecommunitiesneithersafeinferencenorsoundaction
　　canbebuiltuponthem。Asweshallseehereafter，thevalueofmostofthetheoremsoftheclassicaleconomicsisagood
　　dealattenuatedbythehabitualassumptionsthatwearedealingwith"economicmen，"actuatedbyoneprincipleonly;that
　　custom，asagainstcompetition，hasnoexistence;thatthereisnosuchthingascombination;thatthereisequalityofcontract
　　betweenthepartiestoeachtransaction，andthatthereisadefiniteuniversalrateofprofitandwagesinacommunity;this
　　lastpostulateimplying（1）thatthecapitalembarkedinanyundertakingwillpassatoncetoanotherinwhichlargerprofits
　　areforthetimetobemade;（2）thatalabourer，whateverhislocaltiesoffeeling，family，habit，orotherengagements，will
　　transferhimselfimmediatelytoanyplacewhere，oremploymentinwhich，forthetime，largerwagesaretobeearnedthan
　　thosehehadpreviouslyobtained;（45）and（3）thatbothcapitalistsandlabourershaveaperfectknowledgeofthecondition
　　andprospectsofindustrythroughoutthecountry，bothintheirownandotheroccupations。ButinRicardo’sspeculationson
　　rentanditsconsequencesthereisstillmoreofabstraction。Theinfluenceofemigration，whichhasassumedvastdimensions
　　sincehistime，isleftoutofaccount，andtheamountoflandatthedisposalofacommunityissupposedlimitedtoitsown
　　territory，whilstcontemporaryEuropeisinfactlargelyfedbythewesternStatesofAmerica。Wedidnotadequately
　　appreciatethedegreeinwhichtheaugmentedproductivenessoflabour，whetherfromincreasedintelligence，improved
　　organization，introductionofmachinery，ormorerapidandcheapercommunication，steadilykeepsdownthecostof
　　production。Totheseinfluencesmustbeaddedthoseoflegalreformsintenure，andfairerconditionsincontracts，which
　　operateinthesamedirection。Asaresultofallthesecauses，thepressureanticipatedbyRicardoisnotfelt，andthecryisof
　　thelandlordsoverfallingrents。notoftheconsumeroverrisingprices。Theentireconditionsareinfactsoalteredthat
　　ProfessorNicholson，noenemytothe"orthodox"，economics，whenrecentlyconductinganinquiryintothepresentstateof
　　theagriculturalquestion，（46）pronouncedtheso—calledRicardiantheoryofrent"tooabstracttobeofpracticalutility。"
　　AparticulareconomicsubjectonwhichRicardohasthrownausefullightisthenatureoftheadvantagesderivedfrom
　　foreigncommerce，andtheconditionsunderwhichsuchcommercecangoon。Whilstprecedingwritershadrepresented
　　thosebenefitsasconsistinginaffordingaventforsurplusproduce，orenablingaportionofthenationalcapitaltoreplace
　　itselfwithaprofit，hepointedoutthattheyconsist"simplyandsolelyinthis，thatitenableseachnationtoobtain，witha
　　givenamountoflabourandcapital，agreaterquantityofallcommoditiestakentogether。"Thisisnodoubtthepointofview
　　atwhichweshouldhabituallyplaceourselves;thoughtheotherformsofexpressionemployedbyhispredecessors，
　　includingAdamSmith，aresometimesusefulasrepresentingrealconsiderationsaffectingnationalproduction，andneednot
　　beabsolutelydisused。
　　Ricardoproceedstoshowthatwhatdeterminesthepurchaseofanycommodityfromaforeigncountryisnotthe
　　circumstancethatitcanbeproducedtherewithlesslabourandcapitalthanathome。Ifwehaveagreaterpositiveadvantage
　　intheproductionofsomeotherarticlethaninthatofthecommodityinquestion，eventhoughwehaveanadvantagein
　　producingthelatter，itmaybeourinteresttodevoteourselvestotheproductionofthatinwhichwehavethegreatest
　　advantage，andtoimportthatinproducingwhichweshouldhavealess，thoughareal，advantage。Itis，inshort，not
　　absolutecostofproduction，butcomparativecost，whichdeterminestheinterchange。Thisremarkisjustandinteresting，
　　thoughanundueimportanceseemstobeattributedtoitbyJ。S。WillandCairnes，thelatterofwhommagniloquently
　　describesitas"soundingthedepths"oftheproblemofinternationaldealings，——though，asweshallseehereafter，he
　　modifiesitbytheintroductionofcertainconsiderationsrespectingtheconditionsofdomesticproduction。
　　Forthenationasawhole，accordingtoRicardo，itisnotthegrossproduceofthelandandlabour，asSmithseemstoassert，
　　thatisofimportance，butthenetincome——theexcess，thatis，ofthisproduceoverthecostofproduction，or，inother
　　words，theamountofitsrentanditsprofits;forthewagesoflabour，notessentiallyexceedingthemaintenanceofthe
　　labourers，arebyhimconsideredonlyasapartofthe"necessaryexpensesofproduction。"Henceitfollows，ashehimselfin
　　acharacteristicandoftenquotedpassagesays，that，"providedthenetrealincomeofthenationbethesame，itisofno
　　importancewhetheritconsistsoftenortwelvemillionsofinhabitants。Iffivemillionsofmencouldproduceasmuchfond
　　andclothingaswasnecessaryfortenmillions，foodandclothingforfivemillionswouldbethenetrevenue。Woulditbeof
　　anyadvantagetothecountrythattoproducethissamenetrevenuesevenmillionsofmenshouldberequired，——thatisto
　　say，thatsevenmillionsshouldbeemployedtoproducefoodandclothingsufficientfortwelvemillions？Thefoodand
　　clothingoffivemillionswouldbestillthenetrevenue。Theemployingagreaternumberofmenwouldenableusneitherto
　　addamantoourarmyandnavynortocontributeoneguineamoreintaxes。"Industryishereviewed，justasbythe
　　mercantilists，inrelationtothemilitaryandpoliticalpowerofthestate，nottothemaintenanceandimprovementofhuman
　　beings，asitsendandaim。Thelabourer，asHeld（47）hasremarked，isregardednotasamemberofsociety，butasameansto
　　theendsofsociety，onwhosesustenanceapartofthegrossincomemustbeexpended，asanotherpartmustbespentonthe
　　sustenanceofhorses。Wemaywellask，asSismondididinapersonalinterviewwithRicardo，"What！iswealththen
　　everything？aremenabsolutelynothing！"
　　OnthewholewhatseemstoustrueofRicardoisthis，that，whilsthehadremarkablepowers，theywerenotthepowersbest
　　fittedforsociologicalresearch。Natureintendedhimratherforamathematicianofthesecondorderthanforasocial
　　philosopher。Norhadhetheduepreviouspreparationforsocialstudies;forwemustdeclinetoacceptBagehot’sideathat，
　　though"innohighsenseaneducatedman，"hehadaspeciallyapttrailingforsuchstudiesinhispracticeasaneminently
　　successfuldealerinstocks。Thesamewriterjustlynoticesthe"anxiouspenetrationwithwhichhefollowsoutrarefied
　　minutia。"Buthewantedbreadthofsurvey，acomprehensiveviewofhumannatureandhumanlife，andthestrongsocial
　　sympathieswhich，asthegreatestmindshaverecognized，areamostvaluableaidinthisdepartmentofstudy。Onasubject
　　likethatofmoney，whereafewelementarypropositions—intowhichnomoralingrediententers—havealonetobekeptin
　　view，hewaswelladaptedtosucceed;butinthelargersocialfieldheisatfault。Hehadgreatdeductivereadinessandskill
　　（thoughhislogicalaccuracy，asMr。Sidgwickremarks，hasbeenagooddealexaggerated）。Butinhumanaffairsphenomena
　　aresocomplex，andprinciplessoconstantlylimitorevencompensateoneanother，thatrapidityanddaringindeductionmay
　　bethegreatestofdangers，iftheyaredivorcedfromawideandbalancedappreciationoffacts。Dialecticabilityis，nodoubt，
　　avaluablegift，butthefirstconditionforsuccessinsocialinvestigationistoseethingsastheyare。
　　AsortofRicardo—mythusforsometimeexistedineconomiccircles。Itcannotbedoubtedthattheexaggeratedestimateof
　　hismeritsaroseinpartfromasenseofthesupporthissystemgavetothemanufacturersandothercapitalistsintheir
　　growingantagonismtotheoldaristocracyoflandowners。Thesametendency，aswellashisaffinitytotheirtooabstractand
　　unhistoricalmodesofthought，andtheireudamonisticdoctrines，recommendedhimtotheBenthamitegroup，andtothe
　　so—calledPhilosophicalRadicalsgenerally。Broughamsaidheseemedtohavedroppedfromtheskies—asingularavatar，it
　　mustbeowned。Hisrealservicesinconnectionwithquestionsofcurrencyandbankingnaturallycreatedaprepossessionin
　　favourofhismoregeneralviews，But，apartfromthosespecialsubjects，itdoesnotappearthat，eitherintheformofsolid
　　theoreticteachingorofvaluablepracticalguidance，hehasreallydonemuchfortheworld，whilstheadmittedlymisled
　　opiniononseveralimportantquestions。DeQuincey’spresentationofhimasagreatrevealeroftruthisnowseentobean
　　extravagance。J。S。Millandothersspeakofhis"superiorlights"ascomparedwiththoseofAdamSmith;buthiswork，asa
　　contributiontoourknowledgeofhumansociety，willnotbearamoment’scomparisonwiththeWealthofNations。
　　ItisinterestingtoobservethatMalthus，thoughthecombinationofhisdoctrineofpopulationwiththeprinciplesofRicardo
　　composedthecreedforsometimeprofessedbyallthe"orthodox"economists，didnothimselfaccepttheRicardianscheme。
　　Heprophesiedthat"themainpartofthestructurewouldnotstand。""Thetheory，"hesays"，takesapartialviewofthe
　　subject，likethesystemoftheFrencheconomists;and，likethatsystem，afterhavingdrawnintoitsvortexagreatnumberof
　　veryclevermen，itwillbeunabletosupportitselfagainstthetestimonyofobviousfacts，andtheweightofthosetheories
　　which，thoughlesssimpleandcaptivating，aremorejustonaccountoftheirembracingmoreofthecauseswhicharein
　　actualoperationinalleconomicalresults。"WesawthatthefoundationsofSmith’sdoctrineingeneralphilosophywere
　　unsound，andtheethicalcharacterofhisschemeinconsequenceinjuriouslyaffected;buthismodeoftreatment，consistingin
　　thehabitualcombinationofinductionanddeduction，wefoundlittleopentoobjection。Mainlythroughtheinfluenceof
　　Ricardo，economicmethodwasperverted。Thesciencewasledintothemistakencourseofturningitsbackonobservation，
　　andseekingtoevolvethelawsofphenomenaoutofafewhastygeneralisationsbyaplayoflogic。Theprincipalviceswhich
　　havebeeninrecenttimesnotunjustlyattributedtothemembersofthe"orthodox"schoolwereallencouragedbyhis
　　example，namely，—（1）theviciouslyabstractcharacteroftheconceptionswithwhichtheydeal，（2）theabusivepreponderance
　　ofdeductionintheirprocessesofresearch，and（3）thetooabsolutewayinwhichtheirconclusionsareconceivedand
　　enunciated。
　　TheworksofRicardohavebeencollectedinonevolume，withabiographicalnotice，byJ。R。M’Culloch（1846）。（48）
　　AfterMalthusandRicardo，thefirstofwhomhadfixedpubiicattentionirresistiblyoncertainaspectsofsociety，andthe
　　secondhadledeconomicresearchintonew，ifquestionable，paths，cameanumberofminorwriterswhoweremainlytheir
　　expositorsandcommentators，andwhom，accordingly，theGermans，withallusiontoGreekmythicalhistory，designateas
　　theEpigoni。BythemthedoctrinesofSmithandhisearliestsuccessorswerethrownintomoresystematicshape，limitedand
　　guardedsoastobelessopentocriticism，couchedinamoreaccurateterminology，modifiedinsubordinateparticulars，or
　　appliedtothesolutionofthepracticalquestionsoftheirday。
　　JamesMill’sElements（1821）deservesspecialnotice，asexhibitingthesystemofRicardowiththoroughgoingrigour，and
　　withacompactnessofpresentation，andaskillinthedispositionofmaterials，whichgivetoitinsomedegreethecharacter
　　ofaworkofart。Theaprioripoliticaleconomyisherereducedtoitssimplestexpression。J。R。M’Culloch—（1779—1864），
　　authorofanumberoflaboriousstatisticalandothercompilations，criticisedcurrenteconomiclegislationintheEdinburgh
　　ReviewfromthepointofviewoftheRicardiandoctrine，takingupsubstantiallythesametheoreticpositionaswasoccupied
　　atasomewhatlaterperiodbytheManchesterschool。Heisaltogetherwithoutoriginality，andneverexhibitsanyphilosophic
　　elevationorbreadth。Hisconfidentdogmatismisoftenrepellent;headmittedinhislateryearsthathehadbeentoofondof
　　novelopinions，anddefendedthemwithmoreheatandpertinacitythantheydeserved。Itisnoticeablethat，thoughoften
　　spokenofinhisowntimebothbythosewhoagreedwithhisviews，andthose，likeSismondi，whodifferedfromthem，as
　　oneofthelightsofthereigningschool，hisnameisnowtacitlydroppedinthewritingsofthemembersofthatschool。
　　Whatevermayhavebeenhispartialusefulnessinvindicatingthepolicyoffreetrade，itisatleastplainthatfortheneedsof
　　oursocialfuturehehasnothingtooffer。NassauWilliamSenior（1790—1864），whowasprofessorofpoliticaleconomyinthe
　　universityofOxford，published，besidesanumberofseparatelectures，atreatiseonthescience，whichfirstappearedasan
　　articleintheEnclyopaediaMetropolitana。Heisawriterofahighorderofmerit。Hemadeconsiderablecontributionstotheelucidation
　　ofeconomicprinciples，speciallystudyingexactnessinnomenclatureandstrictaccuracyindeduction。Hisexplanationson
　　costofproductionandthewayinwhichitaffectsprice，onrent，onthedifferencebetweenrateofwagesandpriceof
　　labour，ontherelationbetweenprofitandwages（withspecialreferencetoRicardo’stheoremonthissubject，whichhe
　　correctsbythesubstitutionofproportionalforabsoluteamount），andonthedistributionofthepreciousmetalsbetween
　　differentcountries，areparticularlyvaluable。Hisnewterm"abstinence，"inventedtoexpresstheconductforwhichinterestis
　　theremuneration，wasuseful，thoughnotquiteappropriate，becausenegativeinmeaning。Itisonthetheoryofwagesthat
　　Seniorisleastsatisfactory。Hemakestheaveragerateinacountry（which，wemustmaintain，isnotarealquantity，though
　　therateinagivenemploymentandneighbourhoodis）tobeexpressedbythefractionofwhichthenumeratoristheamount
　　ofthewagesfund（anunascertainableandindeed，exceptasactualtotalofwagespaid，imaginarysum）andthedenominator
　　thenumberoftheworkingpopulation;andfromthisheproceedstodrawthemostimportantandfar—reaching
　　consequences，thoughtheequationonwhichhefoundshisinferencesconveysatmostonlyanarithmeticalfact，which
　　wouldbetrueofeverycaseofadivisionamongstindividuals，andcontainsnoeconomicelementwhatever。Thephrase
　　"wagesfund"originatedinsomeexpressionsofAdamSmith（49）usedonlyforthepurposeofillustration，andneverintended
　　toberigorouslyinterpreted;andweshallseethatthedoctrinehasbeenrepudiatedbyseveralmembersofwhatisregarded
　　astheorthodoxschoolofpoliticaleconomy。Asregardsmethod，Seniormakesthescienceapurelydeductiveone，inwhich
　　thereisnoroomforanyother"facts"thanthefourfundamentalpropositionsfromwhichheundertakestodeduceall
　　economictruth。Andhedoesnotregardhimselfasarrivingathypotheticconclusions;hispostulatesandhisinferencesare
　　alikeconceivedascorrespondingtoactualphenomena。（50）ColonelRobertTorrens（1780—1864）wasaprolificwriter，partly
　　oneconomictheory，butprincipallyonitsapplicationstofinancialandcommercialpolicy。Almostthewholeofthe
　　programmewhichwascarriedoutinlegislationbySirRobertPeelhadbeenlaiddowninprincipleinthewritingsof
　　Torrens。HegavesubstantiallythesametheoryofforeigntradewhichwasafterwardsstatedbyJ。S。MillinoneofhisEssaysonUnsettledQuestions。（51）Hewasanearlyandearnestadvocateoftherepealofthecornlaws，butwasnotin
　　favourofageneralsystemofabsolutefreetrade，maintainingthatitisexpedienttoimposeretaliatorydutiestocountervail
　　similardutiesimposedbyforeigncountries，andthataloweringofimportdutiesontheproductionsofcountriesretaining
　　theirhostiletariffswouldoccasionanabstractionofthepreciousmetals，andadeclineinprices，profits，andwages。