312 
LITERATURE. 
built on that principle which Adam Smith has now fo fir- 
tisfaftorily proved to be falfe, that the wealth of a nation 
is to be eftimated by its pecuniary capital. Towards the 
middle of the eighteenth century, under the protection of 
Frederic-Wiiliam I. king of Pruflia, public leflures on 
this fcience were delivered in the univerfity of Halle by 
5. P. GalTer, and in that of Frankfort by J. C- Dithmar; 
and the' example was followed at Rinteln, Brunfwick, 
Vienna, See. The authors moll diftinguilhed on the mo- 
ney-fyltem were Zincke, Gottlob von Juki, Schreber, Bi¬ 
elefeld, Beaufobre, Berguis, and Daries. About this time, 
however, a fecond fyftem came very much into vogue, 
called the fyftem of phyfiocracy ; according to which the 
flrength and profperity of a nation are to be eftimated 
by the amount of its natural produce. The principal 
fupporters of it have been, in France, Mercier de la Ri¬ 
viere, Mirabeau, Dupont, Condillac, le Trofne, and Tur¬ 
got ; in Swifferland, Ifelin ; in Germany, Schlettwein, 
Springer, Mauvillon, Schmalz, Sec. On the other hand, 
the abfurdity of regarding hufbandmen and builders as the 
only productive claffesof fociety, and of rejecting all con- 
fideration of thofe arts and manufactures which, in return 
for ornamental labour, introduce into a country the wealth 
and produce of foreign lands, has been abundantly fhown 
by Linguet, .Necker, Schlofler, Dohm, Pfeiffer, count 
Briihl, Blifch, Arthur Young, count Veri, Sec. At length 
Adam Smith, in his much-read and much-admired work 
on the Wealth of Nations, (firft printed in the year 1775- 
6, ) laid the foundation of a third fyftem, which has been 
ever fince continually gaining ground. He does not, like 
the phyfiocrats, confine the national capital to its natural 
produce, but extends it to the collcElive amount of every 
thing which the indujlry of man can render prof table-, and his 
leading principle is, “ that the productive labour of the in¬ 
habitants, the grand fource of the ftrength and wealth of a 
nation, is beft promoted by their freedom from opprefTion, 
and from every kind of clog and reftraint on their trade, 
commerce, and agriculture.” On this fubjeCt we may con- 
fult with advantage the writings of Stewart, Genovefi, 
Sonnenfels, Jung, Walther, Vofs, and Benfen. 
The various departments of political fcience have, for 
the mod part, been feparately treated with great ability 
within this period: legiflation, by Montefquieu, Voltaire, 
Ifelin, Filangieri, Beccaria, and others; the regulations of 
the police, by de la Maze, Jufti, Pfeiffer, Sonnenfels, and 
des Effarts; and that part of it, in particular, which re¬ 
gards the health of the inhabitants, by Frank. The prin¬ 
cipal writers on finance are Jufti, Pfeiffer, Roflig, and 
Borowlky. 
Hufbandry and the mechanical arts have been much 
promoted by the vaft difeoveries made in experimental 
chemiftry and in mathematics. The art of engraving on 
copper has greatly contributed to the fame end, by fup- 
plying the means of making public the deferiptions of 
machines and inftruments, as well as the modes of work¬ 
ing them. As the earlieft writers of note on thefe fub- 
jeCfs, M. Meufel mentions Coler, Hohberg, and Marper- 
ger, of the feventeenth century; for fuller information he 
refers us to the works of Jufti, Zincke, Miinchaufen, Du- 
hamel, Schubart, Beckmann, Sprengel, Lamprecht, Jung, 
and Walther, and the dictionaries of Jacoblon and Kru- 
nitz. On trade, w'e may confult the two Savary des Brua- 
lons (father and fon), Ludovici, May, Reimar, Beck¬ 
mann, Biifch, and Berghaus. 
Natural hiftory in general derived confiderable advan¬ 
tage in the beginning of this period,, though rather in the 
way of minute individual deferiptions than of any feien- 
tific claftification, from the labours of Gefner and Aldro- 
vandus. In claftification, Ray may be fa id to have fet 
the firft example; about half a century later the great 
Linnaeus appeared, and infinitely eclipfed all the writers 
on the fubjeCt who had ever preceded him, giving to it 
that fcientific form and arrangement which it ftill bears. 
See his article, p. 757. He was, however, vigoroufiy op- 
-poled, particularly on thefcore of his claflification of ani¬ 
mals, by Klein ; who attempted in vain to fubftitute ano¬ 
ther fyftem, more conformable to the principle of Ray, 
but much too complex for ordinary ufe. 
The hiftory of natural philofophy, from its connection 
with that of mathematical fcience, has already in part 
been anticipated. The perfons of greateft celebrity who 
have treated of it are Galileo, des Cartes, and Newton. 
The fyftem of des Cartes has been ably illuftrated by Sil- 
vain Regis, Van Roy, Rohault, le Grand, Clauberg, and 
Sturm. Among the multitudinous defenders of the New¬ 
tonian fyftem, we particularly notice Pemberton, Keil, 
s’Gravefande, Maclaurin, Defaguliers, Mufchenbroeck, 
Algarotti, Voltaire, Sec. In modern days, the controverfy 
between le Sage and Kant, the former an advocate for the 
atomic, the latter for the dynamic, fyftem, has attracied 
confiderable notice. They join iffue at once on the pri¬ 
mary notion of matter. Le Sage contends that matter fills 
fpace by its aChial fubftance, that it is infinitely divifible, 
that there are vacuities between its conftitnent atoms, and 
that elaftic fluids are compofed of feparate particles. Kant, 
on the other hand, argues that the effence of matter con- 
fifts in attractive and repulfive force, and that by means 
of this inherent power it occupies fpace; that it is not in¬ 
finitely divifible, that it fills fpace continually, and that 
there is no vacuum, nor any fluid compounded of diferete 
particles. The principal fcholars of le Sage are de Luc 
and Prevoft; of Kant, Weber, Efchenmayer, and Schel- 
ling. 
The general fpirit of inquiry, which had been excited 
towards the end of the preceding period, was very bene¬ 
ficial to the fcience of medicine. Yet, fo bigotted was the 
medical world to the doCtrines of Galen and his Arabian 
followers, that the fcience could make but feeble progrefs 
until Lunigo (or Leonicenus), early in the fixteenth cen¬ 
tury, dared to bid defiance to prejudice, and became the 
-reftorer of the Hippocratian fyftem. He was ably abetted 
in England by Linacre, and in France by Fernel. About 
the year 1619, Harvey firft made public liis difeoveries re- 
fpefting the circulation of the blood. The abfurdities of 
Paracelfus, and of the Theofophi and Alchemills, which 
had been introduced into the fcience of medicine in the 
fixteenth century, continued till late in the feventeenth 
to lead away the medical world in purfuit of the Panactea, 
or univerfal remedy. Sennertus was among the firft who 
felefted with judgment, from the chemiftry of his day, 
whatever might be really ufeful to the phyfician ; he firlt 
eltabliflied a fchool of rational chemiftry, and publilhed a 
compendium of the ars medica, which long continued to 
be generally ufed. About the fame time, the Cartefian 
philofophy infinuated itfelf into the fcience of medicine. 
Regius, one of its early votaries, was the founder of the 
mechanic fyftem, which propofed to explain all the difor- 
ders of the human body on principles of mechanifm. 
This innovation was violently reprobated by the advo¬ 
cates for what was called the methodic fyftem, which was 
built on the doCtrines of Hippocrates and Galen. Sylvius 
(1672) undertook to account for every diforder from the 
fermentation of the animal acids and alkalis; and he had 
a numerous band of admirers. In the next century, the 
mechanic theory received ftrong fupport from Hoffman 
and Hales ; but it was again ftrenuoufly attacked by Stahl, 
the inventor of the organic theory, who referred the dif- 
eafes of the human frame, not to the emotions of the bo¬ 
dy, but to thofe of the mind or foul. Nearly at the lame 
time Boerhaave came forward with a third fyftem, diftinft 
from any of the foregoing, though fomewhat inclining to 
the mechanical hypothefis. Among the great difeoveries 
in this fcience during the eighteenth century, we mull 
not omit to mention Haller’s celebrated principle of inci- 
tability, fo ably illuftrated by Brown ; according to whom 
all the diforders of the human frame are reducible to two 
claffes, fthenic, which proceed from too much, and afthen- 
tic, which proceed from too little, irritability. 
The number of eminent civilians in this period forms 
a very copious lift, in which the French appear to Hand 
3 foremoft. 
