truly republican, which ought to be a truly parental government, to watch over the youth and children, committed to its charge. No one can fail to be struck with the declaration, concerning Lycurgus, that he resolved the whole business of legislation into the bringing up of youth.'

We are tempted to plead the rights of this portion of our population; for rights they have, though in our republican wisdom or pride, we seem to imagine, that these belong only to 'all males over twentyone years of age.' We confess, that we feel some pity for the little communities, that are gathered in our schools, whose parts are assigned them, often with as little consideration, as if they were the machinery of a cotton factory, shut up to buzz, and chafe, and wear away the appointed hours, but whose restlessness and chafing turn to far less account. We cannot but feel some sympathy with this inexpressible reluctance of many a child to go to school, and are but half indignant enough at the naughty truant. We suppose that he makes as fair a calculation as many of his seniors, and judges, that it is better to receive a chastisement at home in the evening, than to suffer torture all day at school.

Do we overrate the evils, which are regularly and systematically inflicted on the mass of the rising generation? We are not again going over the ground, to which this question would lead us. But we confidently appeal to all, who know anything about it. We are for ourselves satisfied, that where all extraneous matters of interest are left out of sight, where the simple question is between loving the school for its own sake, or not loving it, the entire majority of children in our common schools, under twelve or fourteen years of age, is decidedly averse to the discipline of learning. And we cannot conceive of a more miserable system of mismanagement than that, which brings about such a result. We never saw one of these reluctant pupils, not the dullest of them, whose eye would not kindle, and whose whole countenance would not brighten with joy, if you would clearly present to him one new and intelligible idea. And it is because their reasoning nature is overlooked, and they are set to mumble over the unmeaning sounds of an unintelligible lesson, it is for this reason, that the very idea of learning with many has become odious, and every familiar word of the school room is habitually associated with everything dull and wearisome. We would not willingly be thought_extravagant ; but we cannot consent to be judged by those, whom our own

poor reflections have led to their first thoughts of this interesting subject.

We are not fully satisfied, we confess, with the usual manner in which any body of human beings has been treated, or with the improvement and happiness to which any community has attained. From the spirit of this age, and the advantages of this country combined, we are looking for better results, than have yet appeared. Mr Owen will not accomplish them for us, nor will any enthusiast, however much more generous and philanthropic, or less vain and shortsighted. No schemer nor empiric will bring forward the great destiny which is before us, but it will be slowly and gradually wrought out, by principles already in operation. It will be wrought out by the consenting inquiries, and purposes, and endeavors of the whole people; but the grand lever, which is to raise up the mighty mass of this community, is education. We forget not the power of a free press, so often denominated the palladium our liberties, we forget not our excellent form of government, we forget not the institutions of religion, but all these are to take their character from the intelligence of the people. The empire of these States must rise or fall with the mind. The schools hold, in embryo, the future communities of this land. The schools are the pillars of the republic. To these, let the strong arm of the government be stretched out. Over these, let the wisdom of our legislatures watch. Let not the needful scrutiny and support be withheld, lest their very foundations silently moulder away, and the fabric of empire sink in their ruins.

ART XI.-Notes on Political Economy. By J. N. CARDOZO. 1826. 8vo. pp. 125. Charleston.

THE short treatise, to which the above unassuming title is given, was written by a gentleman, who has evidently made himself familiar with the doctrines of what is called the new school of Political Economy. His object is to examine a few of those doctrines, show their consequences, and trace out the fallacy of the argument on which they are founded. For this reason, if for no other, it will be generally sought for by the true lovers of VOL. XXIV.-No. 54.

22

the science. It is desirable, that some writer of talents should undertake the task, on a far more extended scale than Mr Cardozo has done; give us a brief outline of the peculiarities in the new school; contrast them, where it is possible, with those of the old; state succinctly the arguments urged on both sides of the question; and make such reflections on the growth of this branch of knowledge, as must naturally be suggested by the inquiry. Such an undertaking would demand a good deal of research, examination, thought; something more, in short, to be well executed, than a modest attempt at 'Notes.'

Mr Cardozo does not approach the most important questions; and with many of the conclusions at which he arrives, we cannot agree, although much interested in the discussion, by which he was led to them. In our own country, inquiries upon the various branches of political economy are of far more importance, than in many others, because every citizen here may be called upon to serve as a legislator; and to think of assuming the responsibility of that high station, without some examination of the basis on which it ought to rest, or some study of the principles, by which alone it can be made to act beneficially, or not injuriously, on the general interests of society, must be, to say the least, presumptuous. The knowledge of this science is, indeed, not commonly deemed of such utility; and, what is remarkable, it seldom forms any part of the popular or recommendatory qualifications of the candidate for high political office. For these reasons and others, there ought to be some arrangement for making it more universally a branch of common education; and the writer renders a good service, who calls public attention to any of the controversies connected with it, in a condensed form, like the one before us.

There are some doctrines among the late writers on the subject particularly, which, though they have been thoroughly refuted, and for that reason probably are passed unnoticed by Mr Cardozo, may have a tendency so injurious, that they cannot be too much pressed upon our examination, and shown to be utterly false. The possibility, that machinery may be too far improved; that the saving of labor may thus become excessive; that, in consequence of it, honest industry may be thrown out of employment, and condemned to suffer for the benefit of the rich capitalist, are among the number of them. And to teach principles, which involve these doctrines, as has been done by some very able writers, is to call science in aid of popular pre

judice. Mr Cardozo does not think it necessary to reexamine them. His inquiries are, generally, into subjects more apart from common observation, and therefore less interesting, and probably less important, than those we have mentioned. They are subjects, however, which have called forth the attention of the most acute and intelligent writers.

One of the principal objects of the author's Notes (and, on reading the introduction to them, we thought it was to be almost their sole object) is to refute Ricardo's Theory of Rents, which Mr Cardozo thinks is full of errors, and must lead to very unreasonable or absurd results. We cannot entirely agree with the objections here raised against that distinguished writer, although he has certainly made some mistakes, in his chapter on this subject. He ascribes the rise of raw produce, and of rents, to the necessity of resorting to inferior soils, and the increased difficulty of production. When land of an inferior quality,' says Ricardo, is taken into cultivation, the exchangeable value of raw produce will rise, because more labor is required to produce it. The reason why raw produce rises in comparative value, is because more labor is employed in the production of the best portion obtained.' 'When, in the progress of society, land of the second degree of fertility is taken into cultivation, rent immediately commences on that of the first quality, and the amount of that rent will depend on the difference in the quality of these two portions of land.' There is a slight inaccuracy in in all these statements. Raw produce would rise, and rents would also rise, even if the less fertile lands were prevented in any way from being brought under cultivation. In fact, the cultivation of these less fertile lands will, in some measure, keep the price of rents and produce down, because they furnish a partial supply, and thus make the demand less intense, than otherwise it must become in consequence of the greater scarcity. Suppose a country of very limited extent, where the lands, though unequal, were all rich, and highly cultivated, and where none of an inferior quality could be brought forward. Suppose, that on the increase of population, produce should rise and become very high, so high, that the profits of capital invested in agriculture would be much greater, than of that invested in commerce, or manufacture, or other employments; it is evident, that these lands must pay rent, and the rent will be just so much, as to reduce the profits of capital invested in agriculture to a level with the profits of that invested in any other way. Raw produce first

rises in price. Then rents will rise, because the returns of capital invested in agriculture are greater, than if invested elsewhere, and the landlords will make the capitalists pay for this advantage. It is not till the third or last step, and as a consequence of the two former, that new and less fertile lands are cultivated, or that new capital is employed upon the old lands with a greater return of profits. Mr Ricardo, however, goes upon the idea, that rents will not rise till new lands are actually taken into cultivation, or till a further amount of capital has been actually employed upon the old lands, and with a greater return of profits. This is clearly a mistake.

Mr Ricardo, likewise, does not always point out clearly the true objects of his inquiry. In a treatise on this subject, three topics ought to be kept entirely separate; first, The nature of rent, or what it is; secondly, The origin of rent, or what first produced it; and, thirdly, The measure of rent, or the proper rule for estimating its just amount. Mr Ricardo must have seen these clearly enough; but he makes no such classification, and evidently confounds them throughout the whole of his inquiry. Will not this consideration help to explain away the following remarks of our author?

'The rent of land has been variously defined by Mr Ricardo in different parts of his work on the Principles of Political Economy and Taxation, It is defined, first, to be "that portion of the produce of the earth, which is paid to the landlord for the use of the original and indestructible powers of the soil." Rent, according to this definition, is made to depend on natural fertility. But the definition given of rent by Mr Malthus, to wit, that excess of price above the costs of production at which raw produce sells in the market," is sanctioned by Mr Ricardo. This definition is, however, essentially different from the other, and confounds that rent," which is paid for the use of the original and indestructible powers of the soil," with that paid in consequence of the advance in the price of raw produce from restrictions on the trade in corn, and the monopoly which in some countries is connected with the possession of land.

'The origin of rent is described in the following manner by Mr Ricardo. "It is then only because land is of different qualities, with respect to its productive powers, and because in the progress of population, land, of an inferior quality, or less advantageously situated, is called into cultivation, that rent is ever paid for the use of it." Rent is accounted for in this description from relative fertility.' pp. 19, 20.