honest owner of house property would willingly receive rents which he knew or even suspected to be derived from the plunder of his neighbours, it follows that the members of the predatory class can obtain tenancy only from landlords who are ignorant of the vocation of their tenants, or from landlords who are not unwilling to accept the proceeds of crime in payment. But for ignorance or connivance, therefore, the predatory class would cease to be able to obtain harbourage, and must speedily fall into dispersion.

As to the conniving landlords, since there is no moral difference between receiving the proceeds of stolen property knowingly and receiving the stolen property itself, they cannot expect much sympathy, whatever pressure may be put upon them to compel them to act as honest men. Enjoying their property under the shadow of the law, it is intolerable that they should knowingly allow their property to harbour those who live by breaking the law.

As regards those landlords whose property is infested by criminals without their knowledge, such could not have happened had the public mind been so far advanced upon the subject as to have recognized it as the plain duty of the owners of house property to refuse tenancy to all persons of doubtful character, i. e. to all who could not show, beyond all reasonable doubt, that their rents would be paid out of honest gains, and nowise from the proceeds of crime, directly or indirectly. It could not have happened, even, had the interests of the landlords as a body, in the suppression of the predatory class, been well understood, since, in the towns at least, the heavy expenses annually incurred in the repression of crime cannot but fall ultimately upon the house property-seeing that, although the tenants actually disburse the police and county rates, these outgoings are doubtless considered by the tenant in estimating the rent he can afford, it being immaterial to him whether he pays more to the rate-collector and less to the landlord, or more to the landlord and less to the collector. Hence a landlord who allows his property to harbour criminals is a traitor to the interests of the landlord body, and would no doubt be so stigmatized had the subject undergone that long and earnest discussion which must have ended in the formation of a strong and healthy public opinion regarding it.

Had such public opinion been now existent, nothing further would have been needed than to find the means of restraining the few unscrupulous landlords who, for the sake of high rents, from whatever tainted source obtained, would set public opinion at defiance. The matter, however, has to be dealt with under existing conditions. The question therefore is, In what way can the law most readily deal with house property so as to induce its owners wholly to shut out the thief, his aiders and abettors-so that the landlord's absolute rule may be, "No honesty, no house"? The answer is, that the pressure of the rates now levied for the repression of crime, viz. the police and county rates, &c., do constitute an ample force adapted to this purpose, lying ready to our hands, and requiring only to be rightly wielded. It is but to "put the saddle on the right horse." It is, in truth, simply a question between the great majority of householders who do not suffer their property to harbour the plunderers of their neighbours and the small minority who do.

Now the law, judging between these parties, might justly say to the offending minority, "But for the shelter you afford the predatory class, that class must be wholly dispersed, and the heavy burden of its repression thenceforth cease. Therefore either do as your fellow-landlords do, and so sweep away the burden altoge ther, or prepare to take it wholly on your own shoulders; justice will not allow that loss to fall upon the whole body, which, but for the laches of a few of its members, would be got rid of altogether.' To this it may be added that herein justice and sound policy go hand in hand; for, of all means of getting rid of a preventible evil, surely that of making its continuance a source of loss, instead of profit, to those upon whose will such continuance depends must ever be the most simple and the

most certain.

There are two modes of proceeding whereby to fix the cost of repression exclusively upon the property concerned in harbouring the predatory class, viz., 1st, that of directly imposing the amount upon such property, so far as its complicity can be proved; and 2nd, that of exempting from the necessary rates all properties that should be shown to be wholly free from such complicity.

Of these two modes, the latter would be by far the most easy to carry out. For a direct imposition being undistinguishable from the infliction of a penalty, the burden of proof would lie upon the parties demanding such imposition, who would of course have to contend with the falsehood, concealment, evasion, and trickery of every kind in which the wrong-doer naturally seeks refuge, and but too often with triumphant success; whilst the grant of an exemption from the rates would, on the contrary, be the conferring of a privilege, and the burden of proof would of course then lie upon the claimant for such privilege, who, unless he appeared with a clear straightforward case, would have no chance of success. Any sign of concealment, evasion, or trickery would at once throw the claimant out of court for the time.

Those who are practically acquainted with the difficulty of obtaining legal proof of guilt, in cases in which there is no moral doubt whatever, or none that the person accused, if innocent, could not clear up at once, will appreciate the advantage to the community of thus turning the tables upon the supporters of the criminals by whom our towns are infested,-and this without any hardship; for surely those who have kept their property free from complicity with criminality cannot have any difficulty in meeting the inquiry whether they have done so or not.

As every grant of exemption would increase the pressure upon those owners who were unentitled to it, the accumulated weight would soon force them to dispose of their interests to men who had established such title. By this process our towns would be soon purified from the predatory class. The whole host of habitual burglars, garotters, pickpockets, forgers, coiners, thieves' instrument-makers, receivers of stolen goods, trainers of young thieves, flash-house keepers, &c. &c. &c., would be dislodged from their dens and hiding-places; and unless they took to honest courses (in doing which every hand should be stretched out to help them), they would find no shelter other than the workhouse or the gaol; nor, so long as the principle herein recommended were maintained, could they ever regain their footing amongst us.

The dislodgment of so large a number of offenders, and the total cessation of their criminal gains, would in all probability necessitate the adoption of some temporary measures to prevent their being driven to desperation. Nor should we forget that, fallen as they are, they are not the less our fellow-creatures. We have more than once been compelled, by the occurrence of violent epidemic disease, to make temporary provision for the shelter and maintenance of portions of our town population; and some analogous provision would probably meet the circumstances in view. Whatever difficulties might beset the state of transition, they must, from the nature of things, be but short-lived. The final relief would be both great and permanent.

It may stimulate our zeal to call to mind that which our forefathers accomplished under analogous circumstances. The "sanctuaries" of the seventeenth century were not more alien to the ruder times of mounted highwaymen than the existing "thieves' districts are to our improved civilization. Macaulay has given us an instructive account of the suppression of that frightful den of crime, the sanctuary of Whitefriars-" Alsatia," as it was called-of which Sir Walter Scott has left us so lively a picture in "The Fortunes of Nigel." Some 800 known cutthroats, robbers, receivers of stolen goods, brothel-keepers, &c. had herded together in this "sanctuary" from time out of mind, ever and anon breaking out for the purpose of murder and robbery, as opportunity offered, or as their needs became pressing. At length the public patience became fairly exhausted; men aroused themselves as from a lethargy; supineness gave way to alarm and resentment; the requisite powers were obtained from the Legislature, and at one single touch of a really firm hand, the ranks of scoundrelism were at once broken and put to the route, and the whole mass vanished as if by magic.

On the Study of Periodic Commercial Fluctuations. By W. S. JEVONS. It is necessary that all commercial fluctuations should be investigated by the same systematic methods with which we are familiar in complicated physical sciences, such as meteorology and terrestrial magnetism. Every kind of periodic

fluctuation must be detected and exhibited, not only as a subject of study in itself, but because we must ascertain and eliminate such periodic variations before we can correctly exhibit those which are irregular or non-periodic, and of more interest and importance.

Tables of the average weekly accounts of the Bank of England from 1845 to 1861, inclusive, having been prepared, it is shown that there are at least three kinds of periodic fluctuation observable, during the month, the quarter, and the year. The first two kinds are precisely similar in character, though differing much in amount, and are due to the payments of dividends or other claims which occur at the beginning of the quarter and month. Such payments cause a sudden increase of the note-circulation and of private deposits, a considerable decrease of private securities, a slight decrease of the bullion, accompanied by a larger but otherwise similar variation of the loanable capital.

Eliminating such variations from those of the whole year, there remain certain interesting variations due to natural causes, as distinguished from the artificial distinctions of months and quarters. The notes in circulation rise from a minimum in January and February to a maximum in the third quarter, and then very rapidly decrease during November and December.

Private securities greatly increase, and private deposits decrease, about harvesttime, while the bullion and loanable capital undergo a continuous decrease.

These variations are probably due to a great absorption of capital in buying up the proceeds of the year's industry, which have to be held in stock for consumption during the succeeding twelve months.

The bullion and capital, however, have a second maximum in February, and a subsequent decrease until May.

It is also shown, from monthly average determinations, that the rate of discount and the number of bankruptcies suffer a sudden rise after the harvest months. It may be said that there is a periodic tendency to commercial distress and difficulty during the months of October and November. The great commercial panics are aggravations of this periodic difficulty, due to irregular fluctuations.

Of 79,794 bankruptcies which were gazetted from the beginning of 1806 to the end of 1860, 28,391 occurred in the second month of the quarter, 26,427 in the third month, and only 24,976 in the first month, in which occurs the payment of the public dividends.

The price of consols and the price of wheat exhibits a double minimum during the year.

Notice of a General Mathematical Theory of Political Economy.

By W. S. JEVONS, M.A.

1. The main problem of economy may be reduced to a rigorous mathematical form, and it is only the absence of exact data for the inductive determination of its laws or functions which will always prevent it from becoming an exact science.

2. A true theory of economy can only be attained by going back to the springs of human action-the feelings of pleasure and pain which accompany our common wants, and the satisfaction of those wants by labour exerted to that purpose. These feelings are the commonest motives of action; but other motives of a moral or religious nature must be recognized by the economist as outstanding and disturbing forces of his problem.

3. Feelings of pleasure and pain vary in intensity and in duration. They have two dimensions. The quantity of feeling, therefore, resembles an area, and is got by integration of the function which expresses the relation of the intensity to the duration.

4. Pleasure and pain are opposed as positive and negative quantities.

5. Anticipation of future pleasure or pain gives a less degree of present feeling, related to the anticipated feeling by some vague function of the intervening time, peculiar to each person's character.

6. A useful object is that which causes pleasure, either by present use or by expectation of its future use.

7. Amount of utility corresponds to amount of pleasure produced. The use or

consumption of successive equal increments of a useful substance does not usually produce equal increments of pleasure, but the ratio of utility on the last increment usually decreases as some function of the whole quantity consumed. Let this be called the final ratio of utility.

8. Labour is accompanied by pain, and will be exerted both in intensity and duration until a further increment will be more painful than the increment of produce thereby obtained is pleasurable.

9. The abilities of two men in producing the same or of one man in producing general kinds of useful objects are very various, contrary to the erroneous assumption of Ricardo.

10. When two persons, each possessing a known quantity of a commodity or useful substance capable of division into small quantities, exchange with each other, the unknown quantities which pass between them are determined by two equations, involving the known quantities of commodity previously possessed and the functions expressing the final ratios of utility of those commodities. It is also a necessary condition of the exchange that any portions of the commodities, and therefore the last small portions, are exchanged in the same ratio as the whole quantities. .

11. When there are more than two persons or commodities, a simple law of combinations gives the numbers of equations which will determine all the quantities passing in exchange. The whole system of trade, howsoever extensive, is thus theoretically represented by a system of equations.

12. When the quantities of commodities are considered as produced by labour under the conditions stated in (8), a new set of equations will determine, in conjunction with the equations of exchange, the new set of unknown quantities introduced. Any system of production and trade is thus theoretically represented.

13. Capital is defined to be simply maintenance of labourers while they are awaiting the results of labour employed in a manner which does not give immediate returns. As maintenance may be applied indifferently to any branch of industry, the interest of all (free) capital is the same. The interest is determined by the ratio which a new increment of produce bears to the increment of capital by which it was produced. It is shown to be a simple mathematical result of the above conditions that the interest of capital always tends to fall rapidly as its quantity in proportion to labour increases.

14. When the remaining parts of the theory are completed, it will probably be shown that the rate of wages is the average produce of labour after deduction of rent, interest, profit, insurance, and taxation. These are so many payments which the labourer makes for peculiar advantages enjoyed.

On the Definition and Nature of the Science of Political Economy.

By HENRY DUNNING MACLEOD, B.A.

The author said, as the science of political economy was daily growing in importance, and was now made a subject of examination in the public services, its nature and objects should be settled, as these points had not yet been decided by economists. Ever since it was founded, its cultivators had declared that it was a physical science, and that it should be investigated in a manner analogous to that in which the researches of physical science were conducted. If this were so, it must obey the well-understood conditions of a physical science. These were that it must be some large body of phenomena all founded on a single idea of the most general nature. The purpose of the science was to discover the laws of these phenomena. It must also be based upon certain conceptions and axioms which must be perfectly general. If political economy were therefore a physical science, it must be some large body of phenomena all based upon a single idea, and it must be based upon conceptions and axioms of the same wideness and generality as those of physical science.

Like many other sciences, political economy had undergone some changes of conception since it was founded. At present there were two definitions which divided economists. First, that it was the science which treated of the production, distribution, and consumption of wealth. This definition was first given to it by J, B, Say.

The second was, that it was the science of exchanges, or of value, or the philosophy of commerce. This definition was first given to it by Condillac, who published a treatise on economic science in 1776, the same year as that in which the 'Wealth of Nations' was published. This was neglected at first; but, as in so many other cases in science, Condillac's idea was now rapidly gaining ground, and it was the one to which the majority of recent economists were now gravitating. The object of the paper was to consider which was the better definition. The first requisite of a good definition was that it should be clear and distinct. In the first definition, production, distribution, consumption, and wealth were wholly unexplained. Scarcely two economists were agreed as to what wealth meant, or were consistent with themselves in its use. All were agreed, however, that corn, clothes, &c., were wealth. The production of corn, clothes, &c., was the production of wealth. If, therefore, political economy treated of the production of wealth, it might be supposed that it treated of the business of farming, manufacturing, &c. But every one knew that economic science had nothing to do with the arts and processes of farming, manufacturing, &c.; it had nothing to do with the arts and processes by which things were obtained, but only with their price or value when obtained. Production must, therefore, bear some very technical meaning not apparent at first, and therefore it should not be made part of the definition of the science. Every lawyer and merchant knew that a debt was a species of property. The business of banking consisted in buying debts by creating other debts. It was by no means easy to see how buying debts with debts came under the idea of the production, distribution, and consumption of wealth.

The interpretation of wealth was full of perplexity. No man could tell what Adam Smith meant by wealth. But as economic science treated of wealth, we must consider what that quality of things is in regard to which they are considered as wealth, and how they came into the science of wealth; and that quality being settled with regard to any one of them, it must be generalized so as to include all quantities which possessed that quality. The Abbé Baudeau had a very instructive passage, in which he showed that things were wealth solely from being exchangeable; so long as they were exchangeable, they were wealth; when they ceased to be exchangeable, they ceased to be wealth. Here, therefore, was the general conception of wealth-exchangeability. Hence, if political economy was the science of wealth, it must be the science of the exchangeable relations of quantities. This was now the conception adopted by the majority of modern economists; and we at once saw that it answered the conditions of a physical science. It was a distinct and circumscribed body of phenomena, all based upon a single idea. It was a new order of variable quantities, and of course the theory of the exchangeable relations of quantities must be brought into harmony with the general theory of variable quantities. Adopting exchangeability as the test of wealth, all exchangeable quantities must be included in it. These were of three distinct species:-(1) material products, (2) what were usually called immaterial products, such as the sciences and knowledge, and (3) what was called incorporeal property, such as copyright, shares in companies, the funds, credit, &c. Exchanges of these kinds of property were constantly taking place, and therefore that formed the domain of economic science. The nature of the science was indicated by its name, for oikos was the technical term in Attic law for private property of all sorts; and economic science determined the laws which regulated the exchanges of property. The foundation of economic science was the right of private property and exchange, which was opposed to Socialism, where the right of private property and exchange was abolished. Such a state extinguished all notion of value, which could not exist without an exchange. Production and distribution together constitute exchange. When persons want to have something distributed to them, they must produce something to give in exchange, and the reciprocal production and distribution form an exchange. The whole body of exchanges, both within the country and with foreign countries, constitute what the majority of modern economists hold to be the domain of pure economic science.

This body of phenomena might be brought under the strictest laws of physical science, and all discordances among economists might be decided by the acknowledged laws of inductive logic. It could easily be shown that the modes of investi