112 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. VI., No. 131, 



the mass of economic phenomena in their se- 

 quence, variet}^ and complexity. That is as 

 if a historian should boast of abandoning the 

 attempt to trace social forces in histor}^, and 

 of returning to the description of roj^al mar- 

 riages and diplomatic intrigues." 



Professor Sumner thus describes, in the 

 opening sentences of the second essaj' in the 

 volume before us, the present condition of 

 economic science. That such a description 

 should be in the main a true one is deplorable ; 

 and Professor Sumner is deserving of all com- 

 mendation for his stanch loyalty to well-es- 

 tablished economic doctrines, and to the cause 

 of scientific method as against empiricism in 

 economic research. But if the world has been 

 going astray in recent 3'ears, we do not be- 

 lieve it has been solely because we are a stiff- 

 necked generation. Much has doubtless been 

 due to the sins of the time ; but much, too, 

 can be traced to the shortcomings of those 

 who maintain the true doctrine. Probabty 

 nothing has done more to discredit the author- 

 ity of economists of the English school than 

 the wide-spread opinion that they decide every 

 question of political economy, however compli- 

 cated, by an offhand application of a few sim- 

 ple principles. And it does indeed belong to 

 the intrinsic character of their investigations 

 that a few leading principles are kept con- 

 stantly in view, and that questions which would 

 otherwise be involved in hopeless confusion 

 are thus made amenable to orderly and S3's- 

 tenaatic and frequently successful treatment. 

 Too many writers, not without standing and 

 authorit}^, not without learning and penetra- 

 tion, have, however, gone farther, and fallen 

 into the way of cutting the knot of ever}' intri- 

 cate problem by a single sharp and decisive 

 blow of the sword, — b}' an appeal to the magi- 

 cal force of a great economic law. They have 

 thus given the objectors to the science of Ri- 

 cardo and Mill a real and important ground 

 for their criticisms. 



Unfortunately, Professor Sumner too often 

 places himself in the ranks of the writers we 

 have just been describing. In the volume be- 

 fore us there are three economic essays, — on 

 bimetallism, on wages, and on the argument 

 against protective taxes. In the first and third, 

 there is before the writer a distinct fallacy to 

 refute, a distinct outrage upon economic doc- 

 trine to resent ; and it is in such a situation that 

 there is the strongest tendenc}' to crush an op- 

 ponent by a single blow, to sweep away all 

 argument by a single appeal to an all-compre- 

 hending principle. Accordinglj^, we find that 

 Professor Sumner's argument against the pos- 



sibility of a concurrent circulation of gold and 

 silver may be summed up in the mere dictum^ 

 that, since supply and demand regulate value, 

 all the governments in the world could not 

 make silver and gold circulate together ; and 

 his argument against the belief that protective 

 taxes may in some cases contribute to the gen- 

 eral prosperity is little more than the bald 

 statement that restraints upon commerce intro- 

 duce no new prodnctive power, and hence can- 

 not increase the aggregate production, while, 

 as every tax and every restraint involves waste 

 and loss, there is sure to be a diminution in 

 the aggregate production, and a fall in the 

 general prosperity. 



Considerations such as these are very good 

 as far as they go, and are indeed of the highest 

 importance. The}^ give a prima-facie reason 

 for believing that those who expect economic 

 advantage to arise from protection, or who think 

 it possible to make gold and silver circulate 

 side by side as prime mediums of exchange, 

 are mistaken. One may say more : it needs but 

 a brief and clear exposition of general princi- 

 ples to take the ground from under the feet 

 of all the ordinary advocates, on the stump or 

 in the newspapers, of protective taxes or bi- 

 metallic currenc}^ ; or, rather, to show that such 

 advocates, ignorant of the first principles of 

 political economy, and heedless of the simplest 

 requirements of sound reasoning, had no ground 

 to stand upon. But there are men who know 

 something about political econom}^, and still 

 think that an agreement of all the commercial 

 nations of the world could keep silver circulat- 

 ing alongside of gold at a constant ratio : they 

 have heard of supply and demand, and have 

 some understanding of its working ; they know, 

 as well as Professor Sumner does, that con- 

 gress cannot, that all the governments of the 

 earth cannot, enforce a fiat that a pound of 

 meat shall have the same value as a pound of 

 sugar ; they know also, however, that the de- 

 mand for the precious metals comes in a very 

 great measure from their use as coins, and 

 that their use as coins is in a great measure 

 affected by the more or less arbitrary action 

 of governments. It behooves an economist, 

 under these circumstances, to point out, if he 

 can, that the influence of governmental action 

 upon the demand for gold and silver has such 

 bounds, that variations in the supply might oc- 

 cur — or must occur — suflficient to overbalance 

 that influence. Professor Sumner contents 

 himself with repeating, in every variety of ex- 

 pression, the assertion that government cannot 

 confer upon any thing a higher value than that 

 which is determined by demand and supply. 



