first, political economy was pursued more as a branch of moral science than as a distinct study. And there are a number of valuable works upon the subject written in this spirit in the Italian language. One of the leading thinkers of his day was Professor Antonio Genovesi, whose Lezioni di Economia Civile, published a few years anterior to the publication of Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations," entitles Italy to an almost equal claim to that of Great Britain for giving birth to the science of political economy. Genovesi was a champion of free trade in cereals. He opposed the usury laws, and was one of the first to condemn the vicious systems by which the colonies at that time were governed. He foretold, as early as 1764, the separation of the American Colonies from English dominion.

The liberality of the Italian schools of political economists is illustrated by the remarks of Gaetano Filangieri, in his work entitled Delle leggi Politickle et Economichle. "Inasmuch as there are evils of mankind which are not yet cured, inasmuch as there are any number of errors and prejudices which perpettate evils which still find partisans, inasmuch as the truth is known only to a privileged few and rests hidden to the great masses of mankind, and whereas she is still far from being heard at the foot of the thrones, it is the duty of the political economist to preach, discuss, agitate, and illustrate the truths of his science. If the light which he sheds is not useful to his age or to his nation, it may be useful to another age or another country. The political economist is a citizen of every country, and the contemporary of all ages. The universe is his nation, the earth is his pulpit, and his contemporaries and descendants are his disciples."

In Belgium the leading political economist is the able professor of political economy at the Musée de l'Industrie, M. G. De Molinari. Molinari's journal, L'Economiste Belge, is one of the ablest progressive journals of Europe, and has exercised considerable influence upon the formation of political opinions in Belgium. His Cours d'Economie Politique received the highest encomiums from the members of the Societé des Economistes in Paris, and possesses the merit of being more anti-governmental in tone than any other work on political economy that we know of.

Social Science for its future development and extension does not solely depend upon political economists. Within the past ten years a class of historians have entered upon the field of literature, who bid fair to do more than political economists proper, for the further development of its principles. Foremost among these are Buckle, Gervinus, Draper, Meyer, Martin, and Momsen. History is now no longer a simple chronicle of events, and which, as hitherto, simply served to give a detailed account of the fortunes of a few reigning families, and was almost wholly occupied with the pageants of war, and the idle chat and gossip of courts; but it has become the history of peoples, tracing and showing their gradual development and the laws of progress which underlie this development. It is of less moment to the world to know at what precise period of time the battle of Austerlitz was fought, than to know the social conditions of mankind which made a Napoleon a necessary product of the age in which he lived. This system of study may lead to fatalism in philosophy, but we care not through the medium of what bugbears we arrive at truth. That the historian should do more to develop the principles of Social Science than political economists, may appear a strange paradox, but a like circumstance has occurred in the development of Esthetics as a science. While the teachers of Esthetics quarrelled about definitions and idle words, the science was advanced and its principles established by such men as Winkelman, Lessing, Goethe, Schiller, and Humboldt. This holds equally true in Social Science. What with the progressive advance of History, Statistics, and Medical Police, the progress of social science is no longer dependent upon any one class of specialists.

It is an old but ever true observation that, in progress of time, the sciences tend more and more to react upon each other in their respective developments. They interchange and compare notes with each other, so that it becomes daily more and more necessary for those who desire to achieve success in any particular department of science, carefully to heed the developments contemporaneously in progress in every other department.

S. S.

THE NATIONAL BANKING SYSTEM.

I. The Political Manual; being a Complete View of the Theory and Practice of the General and State Governments of the United States. By Edward D. Mansfield. New York: 1862.

II. The Congressional Globe; XXXVIIIth Congress. Washington: 1864.

III. Essays. By Herbert Spencer. New York: 1865.

IV. Acts of Congress relating to Loans and the Currency from 1842 to 1864 inclusive. Edited by J. Smith Homans, Jr. New York: 1864.

ADVOCATES of the National Banking System base their arguments mainly upon two grounds: its more perfect congruity with the social status of the times, and consequent influence in binding the people together; and its superiority as a currency measure. They argue, that as government, in common with all other human institutions, is a consequence of human imperfection; it follows that when men are perfectly organized that is to say, all wise and all good-government will cease. But, that meanwhile, as mankind advances toward its ultimate condition, each stage of its general social progress should be marked by congruous institutions, and among them corresponding forms of government. Yet, as men, though they progress slowly, yet progress constantly, and as governments, being established by law, are of a nature more or less permanent and fixed, it follows that general social progress and government do not keep the same paces, but that sometimes one is in the advance, sometimes the other. Social progress as a whole advances by slow and unremittent steps; government by sudden leaps. The result is that we often possess forms of government fitted only for past generations, and as often remedy the evil by providing ourselves with forms of government fitted only for future ones. Thus the Constitution of 1787 having emanated from men who were strongly imbued with the radical tendencies of the French Encylopedists, is claimed to have been of a character in advance of its time, and the people for whom it was enacted are believed to have been and still to be unable to appreciate the almost unrestricted

liberty which it conferred. Numerous instances are adduced to support this view. Amongst them is that of the universal suffrage granted by the Constitution. It is contended that this was a mistake. The theory was, that all who were privileged to vote, would hold the privilege too high ever to neglect its exercise, and that as consequently all men would vote, the men who would fairly represent the average intelligence and common interests of the whole people, would naturally be elected to office. But as this theory has been completely reversed in practice, it is believed that to do away with universal suffrage, and substitute in its place qualified suffrage, would be a step more in consonance with the social status of the times. The theory upon which the executive office was created forms another instance for the advocates of a strong government. The Executive was intended to be a mere cypher in the administration of the government. He was merely to carry into execution the wishes of the people as expressed by Congress. But, that as on the contrary, we find him called upon to prompt Congress as to what it shall enact, and that as he has been invested with powers much more ample than it was originally intended he should be, and strengthened by the disposition of a patronage that virtually makes him a monarch; it follows that the Executive Cypher was a mistake, and that the Executive Monarch is called for by the social evolution which has meanwhile taken place.

The application of these premises to the question of National Banks will soon be perceived. If universal suffrage is a mistake; if the limited powers of the Executive, and other provisions of the Constitution were mistakes; and the Constitution itself thus shown to be at variance with the spirit of the age; then whenever it prohibits something which is shown to be essentially congruous or ordains something which is shown to be essentially incongruous with the times, it is proper to go behind the Constitution, and modify it to suit the prevailing social status.

That the National Banking system is essentially congruous with the times, and that the State Banking systems were essentially incongruous with the times, is next sought to be

demonstrated, and thus the desirability of adopting the one and destroying the other, and the legal power to do both, is logically deduced. But let us follow the argument.

First, a national existence is claimed for the people living in the United States. Though it is admitted that phases in the life of humanity all melt into one another; that new ones begin before old ones are extinguished; that no dividing line is discernible, no classification correct-yet classification is insisted upon notwithstanding. The people living upon this continent are termed a Nation; and this point once conceded, it becomes an easy matter to argue from it almost any desired conclusion.

Social progress, it is claimed, is divided into five classifications I. The Individual: II. The Tribal: III. The National IV. The International: V. The end of all Government. Having passed through the first two of these phases, and not having yet reached the last two, it follows as a matter of course, that we are still within the phase of progress distinguished by the term National. Forming part of a Nation, therefore, we are told that our highest duty is to preserve and prolong the Nation, that the Nation is all in all to us, that there is nothing so beautiful in this world as the flag of the Nation, and nothing so glorious as to die in defending it. That our happiness is nothing, our prosperity nothing, our lives nothing -after they have been put in the balance with that gigantic blessing called the Nation. Security of life, happiness, wealth, are only to be valued when they are derived as immunities conferred by the popular will of the Nation. In short, that the first of all mundane blessings is the defence, support, and prolongation of that artificial classification of social progress comprehended under the head of National.

Every institution, therefore, which operates to this end, is deemed to be of the required congruity; and every one that does not, is looked upon as a radical and dangerous experiment. The National Post-Office is pointed at with pride as an evidence of the success which attends the growth of institutions planted in congenial soil. "It almost pays for itself,” they exclaim. The National Coast Survey is another. "It