-or we

life, and affecting the destinies of the great body of the people;might consider him in his humbler duties of the social and domestic circle. We might consider him as the great general of the state, fighting its fierce and bloody battles for its honour and prosperity, or bleeding in the defence of its laws and liberty; or we might consider him as the guardian of his family, the protector in his own person of the peace of his helpless and innocent wife, and his still more helpless and innocent children; the preserver of their moral character; the defender to the last of their honour and reputation. We might consider him as the great Statesman, labouring for the internal prosperity of his country; framing its laws, encouraging its learning and the learned men that are in it, shutting up all the avenues by which any evil may enter, providing not only for the present age, but for centuries to come, giving them the enjoyment of the most perfect liberty; and defending the helpless and the weak against the encroachments of his more powerful neighbour. Or we might consider him as the president of his little family; leading its younger members to the road of virtue and prudence, promoting their happiness, giving them precepts by which they might best conduct themselves.

In one view we find him discharging the manifold relations of a son, a brother, a husband, and a father; relations, the discharge of which nature in her great end to promote the happiness of her creatures has made surpassingly delightful. We see his progress from the cradle of his infancy to the cradle of his reposing age. We observe the signs he displayed of his after life, while playing as an infant with the companions of his childhood. We retrace the days he spent in his College or School. We anxiously note down the studies that he liked-the friends he then had, the teachers who fostered or cramped his native genius. We go on in our retrospect. We then bring before us the spring of his existence. Was he formed for love? If so, what loves did he make? and what was the success of them? What was their success besides on his after life? Did he marry? Had he sons? How did he bring them up? What was his private occupation? Was he given up to poetry and to philosophy or to both? What friends he had? and what was the character of each? The enquiry of man in this view is the province of biography.

The other view of man falls under the department of history. It is the view of his actions in relation to the great body of the human race. Was he an oppressor or a benefactor of his country? Had he really the good of mankind at his heart, or in the specious part of public prosperity was he merely offering in secret incense at the shrine of self-love, or glory, or ambition. We consider besides the effects of his institutions on mankind. In this view we examine him not in his individual relations, but as he is a representative of the great body of the people.

Having taken this survey of the subjects of these two studies, it is worth enquiring the advantages which follow the pursuit of each. We must try them as we try all other sciences by the criterion of utility; and the amount of entertainment which each respectively affords.

The utility of the studies of History and Biography is measured by that of the sciences of Politics and Ethics which are founded upon them. The facts which the historian collects and the biography are the basis of the speculations of the moral and political philosopher. They bear the same relation to the philosopher of the human mind, that a careful collection

more

of physical facts, does to the physical philosopher. The Chemist can no more lay down the laws by which matter operates on matter, than he brings before him the material objects themselves. The Geologist can no more say anything of the changes which the earth has undergone and predict those which it would undergo in centuries hence, than he examines the fossils that are hid in the bowels of the earth. The Astronomer can no more calculate eclipses and the changes of the heavenly bodies, which have occurred millions of ages ago, and which are to occur millions of ages hence, than he has made observations upon them. In the same manner the political philosopher can no predict the effects of certain institutions on the happiness or misery of the people than he has observed them doing so in similar circumstances. In the same manner the Casuit cannot also lay down rules for the conduct of man if he has not observed the operations of the human mind under various circumstances. Society owes its existence to the principles which Politics and Ethics unfold. They it is that have combined the heterogeneous elements of which society is composed, and given it the appearance of one harmonious whole. History and biograghy therefore, which are the basis of these sciences, must also be consequently, the corner stones upon which Society is framed. Take them away and one Egyptian darkness will swallow up the land, and society itself would tumble down to pieces, and anarchy and confusion would regain their empire.

These are not mere idle assertions. The principles laid down may be proved by a reference to facts. A history for instance of the French Revolution, which would dwell on the causes which brought on that terrible convulsion of Society, would secure us from another explosion of human passions, that volcano would no more devastate the land. We might examine the signs and crush the seed before it has germinated. Again we know the evils of popular ignorance and the advantages of the dissemination of learning. What vices and superstitions were engendered by the former, and how out of total darkness arose a fair and beautiful system of Society by the magic touch of the latter what can be a surer guide to the statesman than these. Surely the consideration of these circumstances inclines us almost to place the study of history among the highest of human pursuits.

The same might also be said of Biography. The lives of some of the leading and master spirits of the earth would aid us in forming and regulating our lives. They will secure us from those errors which many of the greatest of men have been guilty of. A life of Bacon and a life of Cicero for instance will open our eyes to the defects of those two illustrious individuals. They will disclose to us their vulnerable point and put us on our guard.

The study of history besides its use to the Politician and the Moralist, has another great beneficial effect on the soldier; what can be a surer guide to him, who has determined to shine in the field than a faithful account of the dazzling exploits of Alexander and Cæsar, and the more solid and no less brilliant achievements of Hannibal, and those of Napoleon and Charles of Sweden.

The pleasure which the studies of History and Biography afford are not less than their utility. They lay hold of our imagination and excite an interest sometimes as thrilling as that produced by the perusal of a roWe follow the march of Hannibal with an anxiety that is very little inferior to the anxiety of the heads of the Government of Carthage.

mance.

We rejoice at his success and grieve at his misfortunes. We conceive ourselves as one of those who fought in the battle of Marathon. We rejoice at the philanthropic and liberal measures of some enlightened statesmen, and anxiously follow them to their success. Again with what feeling do we take up the sayings which fell from the immortal mouths of the illustrious dead. We are anxious to see those which have wrought such beneficial effects for the good of mankind, in their unguarded moments. They whose brilliant exploits in the great theatre we have followed up with such admiration, interest us no less when in their domestic circle, they throw off the garb which they wore in acting on the stage of public life.

It remains now for us to compare the relative advantages of the studies of Biography and History. The beneficial consequences of the former are more general. Every man whether in private or public life might cull from it something that would be of use to him. Every man would get wiser after perusing Middleton's life of Cicero, or Macaulay's life of Lord Bacon. But those of the latter are confined among a few. It is of use only to those who would take the leading part in the affairs of public life, to those who would guide the helm of state or the tide of war, to those who would be the Pericleses, the Demosthenses, the Pitts, the Foxes, the Richelieus of their country. To the great mass of the people they only confer passive wisdom.

CHOONEE LAUL GUPTO, 2nd Class, Hindu College.

POLITICAL ECONOMY.

8. 'The reason assigned by Smith, why the price of corn in rich and highly cultivated countries is generally as high as in poor and badly cultivated countries?' is that in the rich countries land being appopriated a rent is to be paid for the use of the land, and this enhances the price of commodities. This is not a just reason, even if there was no rent, lands being of the different degrees of fertility, captalists finding the demand for corn, increasing would employ their capital to the cultivation of lands of inferior fertility to those already under cultivation for the production of raw materials. The production of the inferior land being less than that of the superior land, with the same amount of labour, in order to refund the second capitalist, the commodities from the inferior land must be charged higher than the commodities from the superior land. But in the same market there cannot exist two prices, consequently the price of commodities, from both kinds of lands rises, and in this way, price of corn becomes much higher in rich and highly cultivated countries, where population, and with it demand for corn, is continually increasing, than in poor and badly cultivated countries, where there is no necessity of having recourse to lands of inferior fertility.

9. The five principal circumstances, which make up for a small pecuniary gain in some employments and counterbalance a great one in others, are the agreeableness or disagreeableness of the employment, the difficulty or easiness of learning the business, the constancy or inconstancy of the employment, the trustworthiness and the probability or improbability of success.

The soldier, who receives a small pecuniary remuneration, is recompensed by the agreeableness of his employment. While a man with a tolerably good fortune will not dare to present himself before a court, an ensign with the salary of twenty-five rupees a month will sit in the

table of any king and dine with him. Such respects are paid to the soldier's profession. The poet sometimes is obliged to be content with mere reputation, without making any pecuniary gain. The butcher, the collier and the brewer receive more pay than those who equally labour with them, on account of their disagreeable employment.

The lawyer or the university graduate make more gain than is usual with other men, on account of the greater difficulty they experienced in learning the profession. What in appearance is their net profit, resolves itself into ordinary wages, rent, and the compensation for their abstinence. When a lawyer or an university graduate make a large gain, some portion of it refunds the capital which they or their guardians employed for their education; some portion pays the wages of their labour, and the rest pays the rent for the use of the natural agents, (their abilities) which they have appropriated.

The ploughman's boy, in whose education very little has been spent, receives a very small allowance.

The seller of mourning dresses, who cannot sell his articles to advantage very often, must make up the deficiency of his ordinary income, by making on particular occasions, very large profits. A day labourer on the other hand, who is sure of being employed some how or other, is content with a very small pay.

Trustworthiness is another source of inequality. Physicians and Attornies are the examples. However, what they receive can be resolved into wages and rent. In order that persons should be trustworthy, they must have some peculiar natural disposition. Probability or improbability of success introduces another inequality. Insurance is the example given by Adam Smith, but Senior objects to this.

10. In Smith's opinion the lower ranks in the country are superior to those in the towns. The husbandman, he thinks, cheerfully works and finds opportunity for exercising his mental faculties, whilst the labourer in a manufactory goes on dully with his drudgery, scarcely requiring any mental exertion, and confining himself to one monotonous business. McCulloch is of a different opinion; he supposes that the labourers in towns are more intelligent than those in the country. They have more opportunity of improving themselves. Where two hundred or three hundred labourers meet together, with small expense on every one's part, they can supply themselves with the best periodical every day, and thus ensure to themselves the means of improvement. Again when a great number of persons talk upon a subject, by the concussion of different opinions, truth is elicited. Labourers in the town receive more pay than labourers in the country. McCulloch is certainly right, at least so far as the present age is concerned.

11. The price of commodities depends upon the cost of production in those cases only where the exertion of labour is free. In monopoly this law does not hold. The utility-price, which is always the maximum, is exacted by the monopoly merchant.__There is only one vineyard, which produces the best sort of wine. The proprietor of this vineyard measures the price of his wine by the wishes of his purchasers. The latter are obliged to pay him the utility-price. But the price of this particular sort of wines may be considerably lowered (their quality remaining unchanged) if the fashion for tasting them wears off. In this case, although the seller of wines is the monopoly merchant, the utility of his article to his purchasers becoming less, the utility-price, which he exacts from them consequently becomes lower. There is another way in which

the price may be lowered, (the quality remaining unchanged). If other vineyards were to be found out productive of equally good wines, competition on the part of the proprietors will reduce the price. There is a third possible way in which the price of these wines may be reduced. If the fashion for tasting them wears off, and at the same time more vineyards be discovered, the price of wines will considerably fall till at last they will sell according to the cost of production, which is the natural price. PROSUNNO COOMAR SURBADHICAURRY, 1st Class, Hindu College.

POLITICAL ECONOMY.

8. The reason assigned by Dr. Smith, why the price of corn in rich and highly cultivated countries is higher than in others less cultivated; is, that agriculture does not admit of greater and more extensive division of labour than manufacture, so that rich countries are hindered from introducing in agriculture such improvements as in manufacture. The reason is partially true, but will not account for the event fully; for improvements are notwithstanding introduced in agriculture, which ought to diminish the price of corn in the rich country. It does not, however, because of the decreasing fertility of the land, which a rich and populous country is obliged to have recourse to as society advances. Land is known to decrease in fertility, or the return from successive portions of capital applied to it are not proportional to the capital. To take a hypothetical case, suppose that a civilized and populous country has been obliged to extend its cultivation to lands which return 50 maunds to a certain amount of labour; which we may represent by 50 rupees; and that another less populous country obtains 100 bushels for the same amount of labour from the land to which they have extended their cultivation. Then, because price is regulated by the cost of production; and that is the same in both cases, the price in the former will be double that in the latter. If, however, the civilization of the former has led them to introduce improvements in their system of agriculture, it may obviate the defects, and their price may be more and more near to that of a less civilised country.

9. The causes of inequality of wages and profits in different employments are:-1. The agreeableness or disagreeableness of the employment: 2. The expense or cheapness of learning the business: 3. The trust that is required from the labourer: 4. The constancy or inconstancy of employment and 5. The probability or improbability of success in the business.

1. The disagreeableness may be considered as so much more labour employed in the business. Labour is measured by the sacrifice, which we make, and he who works at a disagreeable employment, evidently makes a greater sacrifice. A disagreeable employment is generally unwholesome, and compensation ought therefore be made to the man who works at it for his superior risk. Accordingly the wages of a miner are greater than that of a blacksmith; and of a blacksmith than that of a carpenter.

In India the employment even of capital by any of the superior caste in trading in wine is attended with a loss of reputation, and it is only, if superior profit will compensate for this disagreeable circumstance that one will employ his stock in the trade.

2. The expense incurred and the labour spent in learning the business may be considered as so much capital, and the wages of skilled labour must therefore bring in a reasonable profit on this capital. We accordingly find that skilled labour is rated higher than unskilled labour.