TRANSACTIONS OF SECTION F. 581 
field. According to the writer’s understanding of this problem the question of 
the causes of rising prices is a question of the rate of increase of the means for 
purchasing commodities as compared with the increase in the volume of trade in 
these commodities. This study resolves itself into a study of five principal 
factors, namely, the amount of money in circulation, the velocity of its citcula- 
tion, the amount of deposits subject to check, their velocity (or activity of 
turnover), and the volume of trade. Some actual statistics for these five 
magnitudes are available in the United States, but none for other countries. 
There are, however, some indications which show the relative rate at which 
these various magnitudes are increasing in the world as a whole. 
The great conflict of opinion at the Conference will doubtless be as to whether 
the rise of prices means an inflation of money and credit or a scarcity of goods. 
Lf the result of its investigations should indicate that the rise of prices is chiefly 
a monetary phenomenon, this would indicate the importance of a monetary 
remedy, such as some plan for ‘ standardising ? monetary units, 7.¢e., ‘stabilising ’ 
the general level of prices. But whether or not any such far-reaching remedy 
ean be applied or even recommended, there are other and less ambitious remedies 
in the way of saving waste which ought to be carefully considered. Such, for 
instance, are the conservation of natural resources, the elimination of unneces- 
sary middlemen, the introduction of co-operation where economies can thereby 
be ‘effected, the improvement of banking systems, the removal of high tariff 
walls, &c. 
The outlook seems to many of us to indicate that the rise in world prices is 
permanent and likely to be aggravated in future years. Under these circum- 
stances, even though we cannot immediately apply remedies for lack of sufficient 
agreement, the sooner we can secure the necessary data to lead to such an 
agreement the better. 
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 16. 
The following Papers were read :— 
1. The Economic Order. By Professor J. H. Murrueap. 
I. Economics is probably alone among the sciences recognised at the British 
Association, in having not only its particular conclusions, but the whole field 
and method of its work, questioned at the present time. This suspicion is not 
confined to the refined Anarchism of Tolstoi. It is shared by current Socialism 
and nearly the whole body of intelligent working-men who * have no need of the 
economist.’ It is reflected in a certain ‘loss of nerve’ among economists them- 
selves, many of whom claim no more than ‘historic’ value for their conclusions. 
To combat this suspicion effectually and establish the legitimate authority 
of economic science it is not sufficient to appeal from mechanical to biological 
conceptions, from ‘individual’ to ‘crowd psychology’ (art. ‘Economics’ in 
‘Ency. Brit.,’ 1910). This can only introduce new confusion. Nor is it 
sufficient to refer generally to the ‘ abstractness* of the conclusions of the earlier 
economics. We want to know definitely what they are abstractions from, and 
what remains when we have allowed for the abstractions. This we can only do 
in the light of a truer philosophy of the individual and society. 
II. This is not the place for a sketch of such a philosophy. But the central 
point can be made clear. The whole question turns on the nature of selfhood or 
individuality. Individuality depends not, as in the old philosophy, on the 
exclusiveness of persons, but on the possession and adequate performance of a 
social function. To have a self or a soul is to have a ‘place’ in the whole. To 
be a self is to give oneself to a whole. But to admit this seems to traverse the 
economist’s assumption of forces essentially self-centred (if not selfish), and of a 
permanent order, founded on their dominance in the aggregate. Hence the 
‘antinomy’ making the present problem. The principle on which the solution 
of it must be sought is that an element which in itself has no independent value 
may survive as an essential factor in a whole, as a line or a colour meaningless 
