Thorstein Veblen
Review author to: 'Esquisses de litterature politico-economique'. Par N. CH. 
BUNGE, Ancien professeur a l' universite de Kiew. Traduit du russe. Geneva: 
Georg & Co., 1898. 8vo. pp. xiii + 455.
The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 6, No. 1. (Dec., 1897), pp. 126-128.
-------------------------------

[126] This contribution to the history of economic doctrines is a collection of 
monographs of various dates (1860, 1868, 1894), revised and brought down to the 
date of publication of the Russian edition (St. Petersburg, 1895). It comprises 
four essays: Outlines of the History of Economic Doctrines; The Theory of the 
Harmony of Private Interests; John Stuart Mill as Economist; Schmoller's Verdict 
on Merger.
Part I (pp. 1-192) on the History of Doctrines, is a rapid sketch of the 
development, or rather of the sequence, of economic theories [127] from 
classical antiquity (Plato, Aristotle) to the later developments of the 
Historical School, closing with Schmoller as the great and definitive exponent 
of modern economic doctrine and method. It considers the Physiocrats, the 
classical writers, the Utopian socialists, the philosophical and critical 
socialist writers (Rodbertus, Proudhon, Marx), the school of Harmony of 
Interests (Carey, Bastiat), and the group of German writers identified with the 
historical method in economics. It is for the most part a colorless presentation 
of doctrines, and does not appreciably depart from the beaten paths, except in 
the large space allowed the socialists and the exponents of the harmony of 
interests.
Professor Bunge has little to say for the economists of the English line from 
Adam Smith down, and little to say in criticism of them that is not already 
commonplace. The same remark applies to his characterization of Menger and his 
followers, who are classed with the English as "deductive." The hope for the 
future lies with the historical school, or more precisely with the "progressive 
histerico-statistical school," of which Schmoller is the founder.
The historico-statistical study of economic phenomena alone will avail for the 
advancement of political economy; but it is to be recognized that history and 
statistics have hitherto not given us available materials. This is due in part 
to the fact that economists have not recognized the importance of historical and 
statistical research, and in part to the limited range of facts covered by the 
field of history and statistics (p. 182). At the head of the contemporary (1868) 
historico-statistical school stands Tooke, the author of the History of Prices 
(p. 186). [But] it is Schmoller who has come in as the real founder of the new 
historico-statistical school (p. 187).
The reason, why contemporary political economy in our time presents, at the 
first glance, such a physiognomy of distraction is that the time for new 
generalizations has not yet arrived; and consequently this lack of congruity is 
rather a merit than a defect (p. 190).
Part II (pp. 193-301) presents an unusually painstaking exposition of Carey's 
doctrines on Value, Rent, the Effect of an Extension of Cultivation, and the 
Harmony of Private Interests, together with a criticism in detail. There is 
generous appreciation of Carey's deserts, of his kindly motives and his 
abounding faith in the substantial goodness and perfectibility of man.
All that Carey says is true at bottom, but it holds only in certain exceptional 
cases - only so far as no one seizes what belongs to another although he has the 
power to do it (p. 301).
[128] The discussion of John Smart Mill (Part III, pp. 303-433) is more 
appreciative than much of what representatives of the historical school have 
said on the subject, but offense is repeatedly taken at Mill's a priori method 
and his independence of facts, e. g., in his theory of production. The merit of 
this part of the book, as of the preceding parts, lies in a detailed exposition, 
in which, by the way, there is manifested no unusual sense of perspective or 
proportion. The author has derived some edification but very little profit from 
his study of Mill. What he has learned is what he knew already - that salvation 
for economic science is to be found in the historico-statistical method alone, 
and that this method could not be effectively applied until Schmoller had found 
it and set it in order.
Part IV (pp. 435-451) is substantially a restatement, with some slight 
abridgement, of Schmoller's strictures on Merger. What Professor Bunge adds to 
Schmoller's mordant dispraise may be given in his own words.
Il faut ajouter a ces paroles de Schmoller, que ni Menger, ni ses disciples 
n'out, semble-t-il, rien produit jusqu'ici de transcendant.
T. B. V.