43 Set COPYRIGHT, 1911, BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. up and electrotyped. Published June, 1911. Reprinted Norwood Press J. S. Cushing Co. - Berwick & Smith Co. PREFACE Ir is the aim of this book to present a critical account of the whole development of economic thought in the leading nations of the Occidental world; and, while keeping the purely economic viewpoint, to indicate some of the most important relations of economic thought with philosophy and environmental conditions. As it is designed to serve as a text-book for the growing number of advanced students who study the history of Economics, every effort has been made to give a fair and well-rounded account of the thought of the leading writers, avoiding the emphasis of some newly discovered point or interesting but obscure writer which would characterize a monograph. Doubtless there will be some difference of opinion over the relative space here devoted to the different economists, and some cases of omission or bare mention will be criticized. It should therefore be stated that a twofold test has been the basis of selection in this regard: first, what has been the writer's effect upon the stream of economic thought? next, what important point in theory has he originated or developed? If his contribution has been both discovery in theory and a profound effect on his contemporaries, then he deserves considerable discussion. These two phases of importance do not necessarily go together, as the experience of Lloyd, Gossen, and others bears witness. In covering so vast a field it has seemed desirable to standardize the method of treatment to some extent. Accordingly, the general plan of procedure in dealing with an individual economist has been first to indicate briefly the pertinent circumstances of his environment, both objective and subjective; then to discuss his economic thought under the heads of value theory, and the shares in distribution; concluding with a state ment of his logical method and philosophy. But this procedure has not been rigidly adhered to, omissions being made in the case of the less important writers and additional points developed in other cases. Any noteworthy point which is associated with an economist's name has generally received attention. In a word, value and distribution have been emphasized, but are far from being the only topics treated. Some may be inclined to criticize the relative space given to Socialism. It has been common for French writers to devote a much larger share of their attention to this subject, while our most available English work, Ingram's History of Political Economy, leaves it virtually undiscussed. The writer has taken a middle ground, merely presenting a short sketch of the chief socialistic criticisms of the classical English economic thought. More comprehensive accounts of the development of Socialism are readily available in English. Finally, it will be observed that after Adam Smith the chronological development of the subject has been sacrificed to some extent for the sake of a more topical arrangement. It is believed that the analysis followed will lend far more to the interest and intelligibility of the history than would be required to offset this sacrifice. It is perfectly obvious that no writer of a book of this kind can have read carefully and completely all the works he mentions. Life is too short. Moreover, so to read would be a waste of time, even if life were longer. It would take years to read all the works of all the minor French and German authors referred to in the period 1800-1850, and would be folly at the same time. Works of this kind can sometimes be "sampled." Traditional views, too, may often be tested in the same way. The writer has endeavored to form independent judgments in every case, and where traditional views are presented it is because they are believed to be correct. He has been far from opposing a view simply because others have held it. In the case of the major writers, what is essential has been read, and some of the important books have been gone over again and again. The essential part of the views here presented is based upon independent study. Where mistakes are discovered they will be corrected in future editions, and the author will appreciate the kindness of readers who will call his attention to errors. He realizes that, especially in the treatment of recent thought, the range is so close that accuracy and just perspective are very difficult of attainment. In making recognition of the aid which he has received, the writer wishes first of all to make clear the extent of his obligation to the editor, Professor Richard T. Ely. The present work falls but little short of being a joint product. Indeed, it is only the magnanimity of Dr. Ely which has altered the original intention to publish it as such. Some twenty-five years ago, when teaching at Johns Hopkins University, Professor Ely prepared a history of economic thought for publication; but he withheld it for further work, and since that time has made numerous additions. Five years ago, while the writer was an instructor in the State University of Iowa, Professor Ely proposed to him that he take this old and incomplete manuscript and so revise it that it might be published under their joint authorship. Meanwhile the writer had been lecturing on the same subject, so that his lecture notes were combined with parts of Dr. Ely's manuscript to make the present work, the composition being conducted independently by him. The various chapters were submitted to Professor Ely from time to time, and he made suggestions concerning style and matter. Furthermore, during the summer of 1910, Professor Ely went over the work in conference with the writer, and the discussions of that time resulted in additions and improvements. Both directly and indirectly, therefore, Professor Ely's part has been an important one. The chapters on Carey, Bastiat, and List are largely his, also parts of the one on Mill, and his first-hand familiarity with the German Historical School has enabled him to make valuable suggestions on that subject. At a few points, no doubt, even traces of his language may remain. Yet upon Dr. Ely's suggestion and advice, in view of the predominance of independent work by the writer in matter, composition, and arrangement, it has been decided to publish the book under the latter's single name. Accordingly, the writer wishes to express here his deep indebtedness to his former teacher and present friend in the first place, for stimulating the production of this work as he has so many others; secondly, for many direct suggestions as to style and emphasis; and, finally, for a host of indirectly acquired ideas and stimuli without which the book would lack many of such merits as it may now possess. He assumes full responsibility for the weaknesses and errors, while he feels that an unusually large degree of credit is due the editor. The writer also wishes to gratefully acknowledge the receipt of valuable criticisms from the following economists: F. M. Taylor, of the University of Michigan; F. W. Taussig and T. N. Carver, of Harvard; I. A. Loos, of the University of Iowa; C. C. Williamson, of Bryn Mawr; L. M. Keasby, of the University of Texas; J. H. Hollander, of Johns Hopkins; and David Friday, of the University of Michigan. He is indebted to these friendly critics in the order named, his thanks being especially due to Professor F. M. Taylor, who read several of the chapters in the manuscript. Professor A. H. Lloyd, of the University of Michigan, was consulted on points in Philosophy, and made several valuable suggestions. Without the efficient assistance given by his wife in reading and correcting manuscript and proof, the publication of the book at this time would have been impossible. AUSTIN, TEXAS, December, 1910. LEWIS H. HANEY. |