538 



SCIENCE. 



[Vol. VLL, flo. 176 



pare with those of a chemical character, it is ap- 

 parently the only one which is available for use 

 outside the laboratory. The differences in the 

 specific gravities of different fats, which furnish 

 the basis for distinguishing them, seem to be 

 hardly great enough to detect mixtures of small 

 amounts of oleo fat or oils with dairy butter. 



The reports that announced the suicide of the 

 King of Bavaria, a.t the same time brought the 

 news of a sad loss to science. The physician of 

 the king, Dr. Gudden, who lost his life in the at- 

 tempt to save that of his charge, was one of the 

 most noted authorities in the sphere of nervous 

 and mental diseases. He has also been at the head 

 of a laboratory in which investigations of the fine 

 anatomy of the brain, spinal cord, and sense-organs 

 have been carried on. He has given his name to 

 a matter of studying the connections of the ner- 

 vous system which is as ingenious as it has proved 

 fruitful of results. Gudden's method consists in 

 extirpating a sense-organ or other part of an 

 animal when young, and then allowing the ani- 

 mal to grow up. At death the animal is examined, 

 and the fibres which have failed to develop will 

 thus be marked out as the paths of connection be- 

 tween the extirpated sense-organ and the brain- 

 centre. For many years Dr. Gudden has been 

 working at the problem, What is the mode of con- 

 nection between the retina and the brain? His 

 results are not yet before the public, but the great 

 care and patience which always characterize his 

 work will surely make them valuable. His loss 

 in this difficult department of anatomy and pa- 

 thology is a very serious one indeed. 



ASPECTS OF THE ECOyOMIC DISCUSSIOX. 



Within the past two months Science has con- 

 tained three extended articles, in which, in com- 

 pliance with the invitation of the editor, several 

 distinguished members of the so-called 'new 

 school ' of economists have undertaken to set forth 

 their principles. In compliance with a like invita- 

 tion, I now present my views upon the aspect 

 which the discussion has assumed. 



If I rightly understand the case, the primary 

 object of the discussion was to afford the repre- 

 sentatives of the new school an opportunity to set 

 forth such peculiarities of their tenets as might 

 justify the appellation which they claim, and at 

 the same time afford the student an opportunity 

 to compare their principles with those of the 

 school from which they are supposed to diverge. 



The main point in which the new school is sup- 

 posed to differ from the other, is that it looks with 

 more favor upon government intervention in the 

 processes of industry and trade ; and it might 

 naturally have been expected that its representa- 

 tives would define their position upon the ques- 

 tions here involved. 



In this respect the outcome of the discussion is 

 disappointing. After a careful study of the three 

 papers already published, which bear directly on 

 the subject, I am unable to form any clear con- 

 ception of the ground taken by the writers on 

 these fundamental questions. The form in which 

 the question first presents itself to my mind is 

 this : the familiar terms ' government interven- 

 tion ' and ' state interference ' are themselves so 

 vague, that in discussing them we must exactly 

 define the sense we attach to them. There are 

 two or three forms of state intervention. And it 

 may be that one form is good, and another bad ; 

 that one form will inevitably tend to increase with 

 the progress of society, and another to diminish. 

 Again, we must draw a distinction between inter- 

 vention in purely economic affairs for purely eco- 

 nomic objects, and intervention for other and 

 wider purposes, such as the promotion of educa- 

 tion, the public morals, and the public health. 



These definitions would only have been prelimi- 

 nary to the main object, which is to define to 

 what extent state intervention can with advantage 

 be carried. There can be no reasonable discussion 

 over such vague propositions as, ' the state ought 

 to interfere,' or ' the state ought not to interfere,' 

 because every one is agreed that the state ought to 

 interfere where it is really necessary to the public 

 welfare, and that it ought not to interfere when it 

 will not promote the public welfare by so doing. 

 Again, when the state does intervene, it must 

 intervene in the right way ; and the question 

 whether any particular way is or is not the right 

 one must remain open until it is examined. The 

 careful reader of the discussion will see that no 

 progress whatever is made, in the articles alluded to, 

 towards answering these fundamental questions: I 

 am therefore obliged to consider in a general way 

 such of the points brought forward as seem worthy 

 of comment. 



Professor Seligman's paper, on the changeable 

 character of the tenets of political economy from 

 age to age, seems to me a very admirable one. It 

 shows very clearly the relations of economic theo- 

 ry to economic practice at various epochs in the 

 world's history. It implies that the orthodox 

 economic principles of the first half of the present 

 century must pass away, as others have done, with 

 changes in the forms of industry. While I hearti- 

 ly agree with nearly all that he says, when I am 



