The Iowa plain dealer. [volume] (New Oregon, Howard County, Iowa) 1867-1895, 1883-01-04
THE SCIENCE OF POLITICAL
ECONOMY.
fApsx. In the Amcri,r Statesman,

Ueicncc ~ knowledge REDUCED to G
system. Now it is the mooted question
among the best writer's whether the
sabieet called political economy has
ever been presented in systematic
manner. / shall commence with tho
statement that the popular writer's or
this subject have all omitted one grea,
and es>c ltial point.
Personal. or individual economy, is
not pubic economy. They are not at
all alike.
Personal economy IL oil selfshnesa
Public economy must be based upon
justice.
The individual man gets rich by
cheating some other man; by robbery,
stealing, or any process that is tolerated.
by the public.
Rome gathered riches by robbiny
other nations not 80 strong as herself.
England draws money and wealth from
those who borrow her gold by usurv.
But all success founded on robbery,
fraud or any form of injustice is certain
TO be Of short duration and terminate in
disaster.
Public economy is but another name
for practical righteousness.
Thus all the noted economists failed
before they began. In other words,
they never for 4 moment touched the
real question ut al.
Thomas Carlyle sums up the whole
science Of political economy in the words
/ have 80 many times quoted, Give
every man what il his
The complicated legislation Of to-day
il not much other than the rules the
robbers make by which the public may
be victimized.
The bulls and the bears are continu.
ally fighting for . larger share Of the
plumber.
But when the useful classes, the work
ing and wealth-producing people, shall
learn the new commandment ~ given
by Thomas Carlyle, viz: "Thou shalt
not be stolen FROM why, all this fools
talk about protection and free trade
will 60 out Of existence.
Nearly all exchange Of goods is ef-
fected by the nse Of money.
Therefore there can be no science OF
trade outs de Of the money question
And IS The professors Of political
economy have never given any system
Of money whatever, il is easily seen why
they have made such total failure.
1t is the truth we want. not guess
work. Nothing short of scientific
monetary system can save us. Wemust
learn the science of right.
Henry d. Lloyd, in the atlantic
Monthly for last July, has an excellent
article on "'The Political Economy Of
Seventy-three Million Dollars.
He exposes many errors and absurdi-
ties Of the men who assume to teach the
science Of political economy.
But / think that ho makes q wrong
application Of truth in the statement
thst-"The man Of science must tell
things rs they are, and leave it to
the moralist to say how they ought
TO be-"
But is there no science in right and
wrong?
The fact is, the world is wrong; and
the would-be teachers have been work.
ing to reduce that wrong to science.
Wei, 1t can't be done.
Science tells things as they are. Very
welt, many things are wrong, and il
must he the Office of science to tell
wherein they are wrong-to give the
right, TO demonstrate the same aud to
give the remedy and the method by
which it can be applied.
II science can give us nothing but
history, it has no work to do. Let me
illustrate nv notion Of science rs APP
piled to public economy.
John Stuart Mill says, in substance,
that. c. wages rise. profits 90 down ;
and this must be correct, as it rests on
arithmetic.
That is telling things rs they are.
Now, il it not equally scientific to
say that profit robs the laborer?
is il not te ling things as they are to
say that robbery is wrong?
This Mr.. LLOYD to whom l have re-
ferred says: 1T Is solemn truth, that
Of Ruskin's, that every man has to
choose in this world whether he will I've
laborer or an assassin
That is telling things as they are.
But can We not tell something more
II can be demonstrated that the con-
dition of things is wholly artificial.
We have had the science Of wrong,
now can we not learn the science OF
right? Nor. properly speaking. We
know how IL has been wrong, can we
not know how il would be il right?
Truth, science, justice, equity. phil
osophy are in harmony and to great
extent are synonymous.
And the question comes to the man OF
science, What do you know about it?
To tell things ~ they are. must say
the people give away their money to o
class-bondholders, and then they make
it penal offense for any other person
to use public or personal credit aa
money.
That is science!
Now let US use little philosophy by
saying that, il il costs nothing to use
the public credit Is money, it would be
wisdom and economy for the people to
take their own credit, transmit it into
money to the extent required, and use
il in all their business transactions. II
the above is in accord with science and
philosophy, would il not be telling
things - they are to say that the peo-
pie have been fools their rulers rascals
and their acknowledged teachers have
been liarss
lido not make the above IS . state
ment of scientific truth, but mildly
and gently ask the question.
In order to further illustrate my ides
and to state an important truth, / will
present another point. There is no Just
method Of determining relative price
but by competition.
John Stuart Mill says @that whert
competition il not, monopoly is. "
Which is quite correct.
As things are, one farmer can com
pete with another, but farmers canno,
compete with bondholders. The lattel
get all the money for nothing, Will,
farmers are compelled to buy or Dor
row what money they require. and at ,
price which cannot be paid. So that
- fANt thAr0 - M ra0l 80 -,