248 
On Political Economy . 
no doubt furnish a most convenient clue to the whole system of the Bauddha 
faith. 
Considering, therefore, the Kah-gyur and Stan-gyur as collections embodying 
the literature, sacred or profane, of several centuries, the next question to determine 
is when they were first formed. This, however, is not precisely known, but it is 
probable that they did not assume their present shape precisely until the beginning 
of the last century ; similar collections, perhaps, existed, but not exactly the same, 
and it was not until they were committed to the press that they could be regarded 
as secure from those variations to which, from their extent and the unconnected 
character of their contents, they were particularly liable. A conviction of this 
may have led to their being printed, which was done by order of Mi-vang, Regent 
of Lassa, between the years 1728 and 1746. The first edition was printed at 
Nar-thang near Tesha-lung-po, and the same place is still celebrated for its typo- 
graphy. A smaller edition, but one highly prized, is printed at Derghi, 40 days east 
of Lassa. The Narthang copies are printed in very large types on long slips of 
paper, made from the bark of trees, especially the bark of the Daphne involucrata 
of Wallich. A printed copy costs about 1000 Rupees. Copies at least of parts of both 
works, are also met with in MS. sometimes illuminated with paintings of Buddha 
saints and divinities, and sometimes executed in characters of silver or gold ; we 
have several specimens of the latter. The cost of the works prevents their being 
very widely circulated; and few, except monasteries of some note, or individuals of 
rank, possess copies. According to Air. Klaproth, also, the Mongol version is not 
procurable, without permission from the DdlsSi Lama, or the emperor of China. 
This is not the case in Ladakh, where a wish exists to multiply copies as much 
as possible, and facilitate their purchase. 
HI * — On Political Economy . 
As it is my misfortune to differ from the writer, who has lately favoured us with 
some observations on value ; (Gleanings, No. 20, et seq.) I beg to state a few of 
the objections I have to offer to them, as shortly as the nature of the subject will 
allow. To begin with his enquiry into the nature of value, (No. 20.) After two 
prefatory assertions, one of which is, that “ man cannot exist without food, water, 
and air; he goes on to tell us that, “ Before man voluntarily exerts himself in 
any acquisition, the gratification, the exertion is calculated subsequently to realize, 
must, in his opinion, be more than sufficient to counterbalance the sacrifice sub- 
mitted to in obtaining it. He must compare and balance in his mind, before he 
proceeds to action, the one against the other; and that which preponderates, he 
must reckon the most desirable of the two.” Or, in other words, as I understand 
him, he must compare the usefulness of the object with the labour or cost of ob- 
taming it. Now most people would be inclined to call the comparison thus made a 
valuation, and the result of that valuation, or the measure of the usefulness 
of the object, in terms of the means, or cost of obtaining it, the value. Thus, for 
instance, a man in a state of nature climbs a cocoa-nut tree, and obtains a cocoa- 
nut. Here the climbing, or cost of obtaining, would be the value of the nut. But 
our writer would think otherwise, for he adds, “ the result of the comparison, 
must, in the great majority of cases, be in favour of the possession (of the object)'. 
Hence the existence of an idea of value attaching to such possessions, superior to 
something with which man as a moral agent is conversant .” I cannot divine the 
meaning of this last phrase, unless it be equivalent to the plain English of “ supe- 
