CLASSIFIED SUMMARY OF LOCAL TAXATION,
EXCLUSIVE OF RECEIPTS FROM LOANS, AND FROM THE IMPERIAL TAXES.

1. Grand jury cess presented by grand juries (net amount)

2. Fees of clerks of the peace (exclusive of receipts from grand jury

6. Dublin Metropolitan Police taxes

7. Court leet presentments

8. Harbor taxation (exclusive of receipts from grand jury cess, and from sale of investments)

298,127

74,556

372,683

cess)

9. Inland navigation taxation (exclusive of receipts from grand jury

10. Town taxation (exclusive of receipts from dogs license duty, fines, grants for specific purposes, grand jury cess, etc., as above)

II. Burial board receipts other than from rates (exclusive of sums received by urban burial boards)

1,905

152

2,057

12. Poor rate and other receipts of boards of guardians (exclusive of repayment of relief, the burial board receipts which are included in No. 11, and payments from the general cattle diseases fund, etc.) 13. Light dues, and fees under Merchant Shipping Act

Totals

TABLE XVIII.

CIVIL GOVERNMENT CHARGES, OF A MORE OR LESS LOCAL CHARACTER, BORNE BY THE CONSOLIDATED FUND AND
PARLIAMENTARY VOTES, IN ADDITION TO THOSE FALLING ON THE ALLOCATED TAXES.

(Extracted from Financial Relations Returns, Nos. 93 and 334 of 1893.)

MEMORANDUM. In a communication received from the Treasury, the total of the Irish local charges borne by imperial funds in 1891-92 is set down at £2,042,359, exclusive of education. No details are given.

REVIEWS.

Principles of Political Economy. By J. SHIELD NICHOLSON, Professor of Political Economy in the University of Edinburgh. Vol. I. London and New York, Macmillan & Co., 1893.- 8vo, xiii, 452 pp.

Professor Nicholson, though far from "orthodox," in the sense often attached to that much-abused word, is known to lean toward a more conservative treatment of the doctrines of classic political economy than many of his English-speaking associates. In his able and scholarly address, which was printed in the Journal of the Statistical Society, he stated with emphasis his opinion that, in the reshaping of economic theory which is admitted on all hands to be needed, a good part of the classic structure should be permanently retained. The book before us is an endeavor to keep what is tenable, and discard what is not tenable, in the presentation of the subject by English economists from Adam Smith to Mill. It may be not unfairly described as an attempt to rewrite Mill's Political Economy. Although Professor Nicholson says that he owes more to Adam Smith than to Mill, his treatment in externals is modeled closely on that of the later writer. The present volume covers the ground of the first two books in Mill, on "Production" and "Distribution"; and in the main it follows, chapter for chapter, Mill's arrangement. Indeed, as the preface tells us, it grew out of notes and commentaries prepared in the course of text-book use of Mill. Professor Nicholson, it is hardly necessary to say, is equipped for the task he has set himself, a task none the less difficult because he has unassumingly accepted much of the results and methods of the writers of the past. He is versed in the literature of the subject, old and new; he has the firm touch which comes of opinions carefully considered; he has courage to retain old views that are out of fashion, and reject new ones that happen to be in fashion. The fact that he shows comparatively little of the influence of German thought, gives his exposition, in these days, a freshness of its own; though it must be confessed that it adds also to the unmistakably insular flavor that pervades the book. Whether or no economists concur in his doctrines or accept his methods and his point of view,

they will agree that here is a notable contribution to the literature of the subject, and an attempt at a restatement of its principles that deserves, at the least, a very respectful hearing.

As to the success of the attempt, time and trial must be given before a final verdict can be rendered. I confess to an initial doubt whether this will prove to be, on the whole, that boon much desired by all teachers of economics - a satisfactory exposition of the body of doctrine which, in essentials, we all accept. It is no disparagement of Professor Nicholson's mode of presentation that it suffers in comparison with that of a master of style like Mill. Professor Nicholson writes with force and ease; but he has not the eloquent swing, the art of gradually unfolding a difficult train of reasoning, the faculty of illustrating and repeating without redundancy, which did so much to give Mill's book its commanding place. Furtherand here we touch a more serious difficulty - there is the question whether it is advantageous for the learner or for the general reader, to retain so completely the traditional sequence of the different topics. In this regard, much more radical changes seem to me to be called for than are attempted by Professor Nicholson. Following Mill, he proceeds, after a few introductory chapters on utility, production, nature and labor, to an early consideration of capital, the law of diminishing returns, the principle of population. Distribution then follows in the next book, presented again, in the main, with Mill's order; while exchange and money are left entirely for a second volume. It would be a gain for the reader, fresh to the subject, if some consideration of money and exchange were introduced at an earlier point. The division of labor, as Adam Smith's example shows, leads naturally to the description of exchange, money, price and the whole mechanism of industrial societies. A considerable amount of descriptive matter may here be advantageously introduced, disposing of many of the cruder popular notions, and easing the way for the more complex questions of production and distribution. The details of the theory of money and prices may, indeed, be postponed to a later stage; but those who have been called on to expound economics to beginners will probably agree that the complete omission of this topic in the introductory chapters is a mistake. Similarly, it seems to be a mistake in the book on distribution, to treat first of private property at large, of inheritance and of property in land, and thereafter of wages, profits and rent. For the trained thinker this may be the more philosophic and satisfactory arrangement; but for the beginner and the general

reader matters are simplified if distribution, as it takes place under a régime of private property, is first analyzed, and its justification and probable future are reserved for later treatment. Professor Nicholson, indeed, recognizes this in some degree by putting his discussion of socialism, not where Mill put it, at the beginning of the book on distribution, but at the very end; a shift which leaves a wide gap between the discussions of closely related fundamental questions.

So much as to presentation and arrangement. As to substance, the opinions of economists on Professor Nicholson's views must vary as widely as their own conclusions vary or appear to vary. To the present writer, he seems to have been more successful in his first book than in his second. Indeed, the first book seems to be more carefully worked over, both in manner and in matter, than the second. The chapters in the former on labor, diminishing returns, population, are excellent. The chapter on capital is perhaps less satisfactory, and might gain by a further infusion of those old ideas in new dress which the Austrians present in their doctrines as to pro⚫ductive and consumptive goods, or future goods and present goods. The chapter on consumption gives reasons for not accepting Professor Marshall's views on the significance of consumer's rent, but hardly succeeds in doing more than direct attention to limitations in the applications of that principle which Professor Marshall himself cannot be said to have neglected.1

In the second book, the introductory chapters (apart from the possible mistake in making them introductory) and the chapters on the history of custom, feudalism and land tenure, are again good; though a doubt might be raised here also as to whether the historical matter is introduced in the most advantageous order. On the deep-reaching question of the principles of ideal distribution, there will inevitably be difference of opinion; and it would certainly seem that Professor Nicholson lays undue stress on the efficient organization of production as the dominant aim of distribution. On the crucial and much-debated topics of general wages and profits, the exposition seems to the present writer least satisfactory of all. We have a rejection of the wages-fund doctrine in its bearing on general wages, with yet some implication that it has a basis of truth as to the dealings of particular groups of laborers with their employers. In fact, any basis of truth (and there is a substantial amount of it)

1 In the Economic Journal for March, 1894, Professor Edgeworth presents some effective criticism on the objections raised by Professor Nicholson to the doctrine of consumer's rent.