Images de page
PDF
ePub

work, by its threatened hardships, often represses desires; wants, by their presence, give to wealth its values.

These ac

tions and reactions are constantly at work in the business world, and account for much of the phenomena it presents. As they will be more properly discussed in a coming chapter, they are not followed further here.

7. Sectors of the circle.-Each sector in this economic circle both separates and unites the other two.

1. Between wants and wealth lies the work necessary to their meeting. What a man wants he must work for, or give in exchange the products of work already done by himself or another. Work is the efficient mean between wants and their gratifications.

2. Between wealth as a good to be coveted, and work as an effort to be dreaded, come in wants, lending new attraction to the object they crave, and new stimulation to the efforts they inspire. Wants constitute the reconciling means between a feared evil and a desired good. Men overcome their native indolence and go cheerfully to their toil so soon as their desire for the goods to be gained becomes strong enough.

3. Between wants as conditions of disquiet, and work as a condition of drudgery, the goods of wealth come in, giving force and activity to desire, and lessening the dread of toil. The impulsion of wants is thus helped to overcome the repulsion of work, and the antagonism between them is for the time destroyed.

All these statements are only so many different aspects of the same fact the close interdependence of the three facts of want, work, and wealth. But each one of these aspects has its place in the history of industry. Sometimes the wants to be satisfied will seem to be the prominent and controlling phenomena; at other times work will fill the foreground; and, in other cases, the vision of the wealth concerned will throw both the others into the shadow. A failure to hold their

strictly reciprocal character in mind has produced much confusion of thought.

8. The three names of economic science.-From the mutual relations and union of these three great factors of political economy, it is evident that the science might take its name from either one of the three. Thus, we might call it the science of man's economic desires or wants; or the science of work or of the industries; or, finally, the science of wealth. Under either title we should be led into the same field, though entering it on different sides. Thus, in discussing the economic wants—that is, the wants whose gratification demands effort—we must necessarily consider the wealth which satisfies these wants, and the work which produces it. So, also, if we undertake the study of the industries, we must take into our view the desires which give aim and impulse to these industries, and the wealth which it is their object to create.

The title, "Science of Wealth," has already been employed by J. B. Say, and by Count Pelegrino Rossi, his successor in the chair of political economy in the College of France; and it has been taken as a title for their books, by Prof. A. Walker, and Prest. Sturtevant, in America.

From another point of view, J. Stuart Mill, De Quincey, Prof. Bowen, and others, have defined political economy as a mental and moral science, because built on the action of human desires, and taking its laws from them. These economists would name the science from its causes or forces, as the others would from its effects or results.

We might, with the same propriety, name it from work, the series of activities which lie between the cause and effect. The title, Science of Work, or Science of Industries, would

*The Dictionary of Political Economy (Dictionnaire de L'Économie Politique, Coquelin & Guillaumin, Paris, 1873), under the question, "Is wealth the object of economic science, or is it industry, the source of wealth?" says: "C'est en réalité le travail humain, l'industrie humaine,

need no more explanation to show its application to the field of Political Economy than does that of Science of Wealth.

It is an obscure survival of the old feudal sentiment which worshiped wealth, but despised the labor which produced it, that prefers the title “Science of Wealth” to the “Science of Work." Certainly, to the unprejudiced eye of the statesman or philanthropist, wealth is neither so conspicuous nor so significant a fact as the marching armies of labor-the great fighting columns of industry. The man is greater than his possessions. The worker is a more important fact than the products of his work. The real business of economic science is to comprehend and guide human industry. It is the gospel of work, not merely of wealth.

Since no single word can be found which will express at once, and in their true relations, the three chief elements and fields of our science, we must content ourselves with the old name, political economy, putting into it, as we find them, all the truths and meanings which the science embraces.

source des richesses, qui fait l'objet des investigations économiques." It is, in reality, human labor, human industry, the source of wealth, which . forms the object of economic investigations. Vol. 1, p. 651. On the following page, the writer calls political economy: "La science des lois du monde industriel "-the science of the laws of the industrial world. And he adds that this title seems to him "nobler, more comprehensive, and more exact."

CHAPTER II.

THE THREE ECONOMIC SCIENCES.

9. Man in economic science.-We advance now to a nearer view. The three world-wide, fundamental facts-human wants, work, and wealth-have been shown to constitute the broad field of economic science. We are now to see how this science divides into three.

We have affirmed that man must be understood as a constant and potential presence in political economy. The science begins and ends with man-the wealth-seeker, the wealth-winner, and the wealth-owner. Hence, whatever great natural laws of development, organization, or change affect humanity will also affect the laws of man's wants and industries.

10. Mankind, society, nations.-Man appears to us under three great natural aspects: 1. As mankind, or the aggregated humanity; 2. As human society, organized under the power of certain natural affinities and needs; 3. As nations organized for political ends and under political laws.

Under the first we have simply the human herd-the great mass of individual beings, each with the simple wants, capacities, and powers of a human being. Under the second, the herd appears organized with all the wants and conditions of organized society added. In the third, we find the compact body politic-a sort of political person called the state, including in it individuals, and including also all phenomena of society. Each of these three aspects, or conditions of humanity, has its own economic phenomena and laws. Political economy,

P. E.-2.

(17)

therefore, will be marked by the same broad aspects and divisions, and will give us three sciences instead of a single

one.

Adopting for these sciences names already in use, though with a modified signification, we may style them:

1. The Science of Value, or pure economics;

2. Social Economy; and,

3. National Economy.

II. Pure Economics.-If we study the industrial life of mankind, separate from all consideration of social or national conditions and divisions, we shall obtain a science of pure economics, which we shall call the Science of Value. The name is not without objection, but the term value, more nearly than any other of those sanctioned by use, covers the whole phenomena of economic life. The real meaning of this term-value—will be shown in another chapter.

The scope of this science has already been partly shown in the preceding chapter. It is the natural history, as it were, of work and wealth. It embraces all the phenomena which naturally arise out of the relation of the three great economic factors, want, wealth, and work. Like all pure sciences, it deals with general principles and laws rather than with particular applications and phenomena. It is that science of political economy which so many modern writers, like Smith and Quesnay, Say and Mill, Rossi and Senior, Wayland and Carey, Walker and Bowen, have attempted to develop, and which seeks to know all the laws that center in the notion of value, and go out from it to influence human affairs.

12. Social Economy.-If now among the facts and principles of this science of value we bring in human society, with its social forces and necessities, its various social ranks, classes, and conditions, its poverty and riches, its learning and ignorance, its masters and servants, its capitalists and laborers, its dependent childhood and its sustaining parenthood, its crimes and charities, its homes, churches, and schools, it is clear that

« PrécédentContinuer »