CHAPTER XVIII

CONDITION OF THE SCIENCE IN THE EARLY SEVENTIES

A. John E. Cairnes

To remedy this condition, John Elliot Cairnes, professor of Political economy from 1856 to 1859 in Dublin and later in Queen’s College, Galway, and from 1866 to the time of his death in 1875 at University College, London, undertook the defense of the classical system in a series of lectures delivered in Dublin in 1857 and subsequently published in book form under the title The Character and Logical Method of Political Economy.

CHAPTER XIX

SOME CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES OF THE LAST HALF-CENTURY

The magnitude and number of changes during the last half-century and the complexity of the influences that produced them render its characterization very difficult. It is difficult even to segregate those characteristics that are the most important from the point of view of their influence on the development of economics. The following are certainly noteworthy, though it may not be possible in every case to point out the precise manner in which each has affected the development of the science.

CHAPTER XX

“In the early seventies began a noteworthy series of attempts to reconstruct some of the leading doctrines of political economy on a basis in many respects different from that on which the classical economists built. These were accompanied by an equally noteworthy reaction against the historical school.”

CHAPTER XXI

“More than a decade passed after the publication of Menger’s Grundsätze before public evidence of any considerable support of the theories therein expounded appeared. The dominance of the Historical School in Germany was probably partly responsible for this tardy recognition. At any rate it was not until after the publication of Menger’s criticism of the Historical School in 1883 that books and monographs expounding, expanding, and developing these theories appeared.

CHAPTER XXII

EUGEN VON BÖHM-BAWERK

The most widely known of the Austrian group is Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk, who was born in Brunn, Austria, December 2, 1851. He studied law and political science at Vienna and political economy at Heidelberg, Leipzig, and Jena, married a sister of Von Wieser and became privatdocent at Vienna in 1880. He was soon transferred to Innsbruck as extraordinary professor and in 1884 raised to the rank of ordinary professor.

CHAPTER XXIII

SOME APPLICATIONS AND RESTATEMENTS OF AUSTRIAN DOCTRINE

No substantial addition to the body of doctrine expounded in the preceding chapters has been made, but certain applications and restatements of these theories, not heretofore discussed, are noteworthy.

CHAPTER XXIV

CRITICISMS OF THE AUSTRIAN DOCTRINES

A. The Marginal Utility Theory of Value

The basic doctrine of the Austrian School, the marginal utility theory of value, has appealed to and been adopted by many economists, but has been criticized by others. The controversy still rages and the end is not yet in sight. There is a middle class that has adopted the marginal utility analysis in their explanation of demand, but has reverted to the old analysis of costs in its explanation of supply.

CHAPTER XXV

JOHN BATES CLARK

While the Austrian economists were developing their system of thought on the basis of Menger’s Grundsätze, a young American was working independently along lines in some respects similar. Like them he was attempting to reconstruct economic science, and in the field of value he developed a theory in fundamentals like theirs. In the field of distribution his thought followed different lines, and he worked out a body of theory quite different and much more rounded-out and complete than theirs. This young man was John B.

CHAPTER XXVI

ALFRED MARSHALL

In some respects Alfred Marshall’s relation to his generation was similar to that of John Stuart Mill’s to his. Like Mill, he attempted to bring the science up to date and like him he built upon classical foundations. He resembled Mill also in his humanitarian spirit and in his desire to improve conditions, especially the standard of life of the laboring classes. While not quite so close, his relation to Mill was not unlike Mill’s relation to Ricardo.