The Past and the Present of Political Economy [pp. 225-235]

THE
OVERLAND MONTH LY.
DEVOTED TO
THE DIE VEL OPMENAT OF THE CO UNTR Y.
VOL. II. (SECOND SERIES.)-SEPTEMBER, 1883.-NO. 9.
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT OF POLITICAL ECONOMY.
"THE Wealth of Nations" was published
in 1776. Its centennial was celebrated in
i876 with more or less formality in various
countries. In England prominent politicians
and economists held a symposium to do homage to the memory of Adam Smith, its author.
The occasion was remarkable on more than
one account. At that time it was the only
book to which had ever been awarded
the honor of a centenary commemoration;
though since then, in i88i, the centennial
of Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" has
been celebrated both at Concord and K6nigsberg. But the chief significance of the
event, taken in connection with the discussion thereby evoked, consisted in the fact
that, while it brought to light dissatisfaction
on the part of political economists themselves
with previous economic methods and conclusions, it was at the same time the herald
of a new era in political economy. It announced to the world that a revolution in
political, social, and economical sciences had
already begun, and in various countries had
met with no inconsiderable success.
Nevertheless, in i876, as at present, there
were not lacking ardent defenders of past
learning. Upon the occasion to which
we have referred, a distinguished speaker
VOL. II.-I 5.
claimed for Adam Smith "the power of having raised political economy to the dignity
of a true science; the merit, the unique
merit among all men who ever lived in the
world, of having founded a deductive and
demonstrative science of human actions and
conduct; the merit, in which no man can approach him, that he was able to treat subjects
of this kind with which political economists
deal, by the deductive method." In the same
year, Mr. Bagehot, an equally faithful follower of the older English school of political
economy, wrote as follows: "The position of
political economy is not altogether satisfactory. It lies rather dead in the public mind.
Not only does it not excite the same interest as formerly, but there is not exactly the
same confidence in it." And at the Adam
Smith banquet itself, Emile de Laveleye, the
distinguished Belgian professor, described a
younger, rising school of political economists
investigating economic problems with another spirit and different methods. Thus were
brought together representatives of two
schools: the older school proud of the age
and respectability of their doctrines, but disheartened at the loss of public confidence;
the younger school hopeful because convinced that the future belonged to them.