74 



W. CUNNINGHAM, D.D._, ARCHDEACON OF ELY, ON 



that he was jealous of the fah^ fame of the science, and deter- 

 mined to present it in a form in which it could no longer be 

 stigmatised as selfish, but should concern itself with motives to 

 action of many kinds, altruistic as well as self-regarding. As 

 thus re-cast, it seems to give a doctrine of what is wise to do in 

 regard to material things ; and Professor Pigou in his inaugural 

 lecture* insisted on the practical aspects of Economic Science, 

 though he reserved the right to speak authoritatively to the 

 chosen few who can conjure wdth the mysteries of statistics. 

 He does not disclaim the power of giving positive guidance ; 

 he seems to think the scientific economist could really do it if 

 only he had time enough. Unfortunately the age is in a hurry, 

 and wants to act, while academic economists are temporising 

 and weaving a web of pretentious words. 



Prom the point of view of the plain man it is important 

 that morality should be taken into account adequately, if it is 

 dealt with at all. The old Political Economy did not pretend 

 to deal with it, and disclaimed any pretension to use the word 

 " ought " ; the " new " Political Economy speaks with a less cer- 

 tain sound. The " new " Political Economy does not allow fully 

 and properly for the operation of public spirit or the sense of 

 duty ; such things evade the economic calculus ; but still it 

 professes to take account of them as utilities, and merges them 

 all in the calculation of expediencies. The older economists 

 could make clear what they were talking about ; and especially 

 could specify what they left out of account temporarily, in 

 order that proper stress might be laid upon these other factors 

 at the proper time. Just because the older economists made it 

 quite clear what they assumed and what they had before them, 

 it is possible to learn a great deal even from their mistakes ; it 

 is very instructive to try and see how far a man like MacCulloch 

 was mistaken, and why he was mistaken, and this is possible 

 because his treatment was really scientific. But the "new" 

 Political Economy never makes plain what it assumes ; it is so 

 far concerned with subjective forces that it is difficult to use it 

 to explain the actual occurrences of the past, or to test it by 

 them. I have argued elsewhere that in framing it there has 

 been an abandonment of the scientific attitude, and that the 

 result is a mere " hybrid " sciencef ; it fails to provide a good 



Economic Science in Relation to Practice^ 1908. 

 t The Wisdom of the Wise, 17. Compare also the criticisms of the 

 New Political Economy, by Professor Nicholson {Principles of Political 

 Economy. L. 51-65). Professor Ashley (Presidential Address to Section F 



