Showing 20 results

11 Victoria Sq. - [John Ramsay] McCulloch provided for his widow but left little for his children: Mrs Mackay is widowed with a son and would like to work as a housekeeper; Black has approached Lord Stanley as the new Post Office in Edinburgh will need one when it opens in September; asks Milnes to do the same.

View images of this item

RJ is at work on his first lecture as Professor of Political Economy at King's College, and should have a copy to show WW in ten days time: 'In the mean time I find I cannot limit my subject without a definition of wealth, which however I shall declare to be merely arbitrary and meant to convey no knowledge but a knowledge of what wealth I meant to treat of and what to neglect or exclude . Malthus's is The material objects necessary, useful or agreeable to man, which have required some portion of human exertion to appropriate or produce. MacCulloch's [J.R. McCulloch] those articles or products which have exchangeable value, and are either necessary, useful or agreeable to man'. McCulloch 'takes in immaterial wealth[,] skill[,] wisdom etc. service of menials etc. and limits, by the phrase exchangeable value. If he had kept the word material I would not have quarrelled with his exchangeable value which Malthus admits in the Quarterly'. However, 'it has misled Mac. himself to call Political economy the science of values and Whately [Richard Whately] into arguing that Political economists have nought to do with wealth save so far forth as it has exchangeable value'. RJ would like 'to stick wherever I can to Malthus but he has abandoned his own definition and it is clear exchangeable value is a dangerous attribute to define from where logicians or Scotch systematizers are to be found'. RJ proposes: 'The material objects which are appropriated by man previous to being used by him (I like used best) to their consumption. This shuts out light, air, water, (not appropriated) and skill[,] menial services etc. avoids the necessity of the words necessary[,] useful or agreeable because no one takes the trouble to appropriate what is none of these - includes the idea of exchangeable value since whatever is appropriated may be exchanged and shuts out all temptation to talk nonsense about the science being a science of values - confined to exchanges etc'. RJ re-phrases his definition of wealth - 'The material objects which man appropriates, before he uses them avoiding both the participles on which are appropriated by man before he uses them I like the last best'.

Includes correspondence with McCullough, Malthus, Mill and Trower, 'The High Price of Bullion', 'Proposals for an Economic and Secure Currency', 'Essay on Profits', 'Sinking fund' and 'Protection to Agriculture'.

RJ accepts WW's offer to be a bystander and gives up all idea of writing anything himself [responding to John McCulloch's adverse review of RJ's book - 'Review of An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth and on the Sources of Taxation By the Rev. Richard Jones', Edinburgh Review, 1831]. However, RJ does think WW should see what he has written and he will send him a copy. He will also 'send back you Pryme's [George Pryme] letter. The professor's chemical illustration is so ingenious that it is almost a pity it is inapplicable - but though neither he nor McCulloch can comprehend it, yet the fact is (as you will see) that I have in tracing farmers rents made no such confusion as that which they complain of and I have asked pure rents and rejected returns to landlords improvements with a strictness of abstract analysis which ought to please them - but which has only puzzled them - as to the metayers - do turn to page 73 and 74 where I have stated nearly what Pryme states himself, as to the mixture of funds - I promised more. I am afraid his memory is not as good as might be wished for'. RJ is sorry WW is to be on the Council of the Royal Society. Does WW know that Charles Babbage is 'concocting some thunder to crush Daniel who preached against his Causes of Decline ['Reflections on the Decline of Science in England and on some of its Causes', 1830] in his inaugural lecture at King's College - B.'s murder of Sabine [Edward Sabine] has made him blood thirsty and adventurous - he will commit more slaughter very likely - but when a man runs amuck he always gets slain at last - this warlike project of his is a secret mind, pray do not let it escape or I shall have a taste of the create'. RJ is annoyed with WW over his decision to be on the Council of the Royal Society because 'I find to my infinite vexation that party feeling is still so high in turn that you will lose some of the good will of people not otherwise than estimable'. RJ's reviewer in the Quarterly Review 'is a man of fortune - a ministerialist - rather an ultra liberal and apparently so ashamed of writing in the Tory Journal that he makes a point of concealment which will not last long I dare say - even what I tell you however is to be a great secret' ['Review of An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth and the Sources of Taxation By Rev. Richard Jones, Quarterly Review, 1831].

The Quarterly Review is out - 'from the internal evidence of the article and the more direct testimony of old Jacob [William Jacob] I learn that it is not yours but another which Lockhart [John G. Lockhart] has permitted the same person to write who has done their political economy lately and has done Whately in this - now I know that we shall both feel exactly alike on this occasion - indignation at L's gratuitous impertinence mixed with thankfulness that our child has got this lift from any hand so opportunely in its hour of need' ['Review of An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth and the Sources of Taxation By Rev. Richard Jones, Quarterly Review, 1831]. RJ suggests ways of responding to J. R. McCulloch's adverse review ['Review of An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth and on the Sources of Taxation By the Rev. Richard Jones', Edinburgh Review, 1831]: 'I shall send you my papers on Macs article which I shall lay aside for the present - I have analysed it now pretty compleatly and desire no better weapon to belabor him with. It abounds with instances of misrepresentation and ignorance so glaring that they must be striking and what surprises me more, with more than one proof that he is often honestly (if I may complement a term with any thing belonging to him but honesty[)] incapable of understanding much of my reasoning deductive as well as inductive - how the devil did he understand Ricardo? or am I really more abstruse than I meant to be? - Mac's willful sins however predominate of which I hope he will live to repent'. The review of Whately is good in design but indifferent in execution [The Quarterly Review, 1832]. RJ expects a great piece of work from John Herschel 'if he lives and does not let astronomy engross him at last, about which I have my fears, for I can see nothing likely to come of it in either hemisphere which I think worthy of him.

RJ will soon send WW his refutation of McCulloch's assertions [J. R. McCulloch, 'Review of An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth and on the Sources of Taxation By the Rev. Richard Jones', Edinburgh Review, 1831] - 'which will shew distinctly what even you will be surprised at the impudent mendacity of almost all Macs assertions more especially as to Ricardo's not meaning to treat of any other than farmers rents'. The use of the Politor [or Politar] in the review 'was a desperate one and the result of my examination in the establishment of a very curious coincidence between the proportion of the crops paid to the harvest laborer in Cato's time and country and our own'. RJ is confident that WW 'will live to see your foster child the book ['An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth and on the Sources of Taxation', 1831] acknowledged to contain new and useful truths although I begin to see that they are not the most popular commodities to deal in'. The lower classes in RJ's area 'are not in a comfortable state fires have begun again but we have still a good chance they say of a quieter winter than the last - if cowardice and submission can make any people safe we are so - our Tory squires are taking the chair at reform meetings and one of their order moved some resolutions to the rabble of Sevenoaks a few days ago in favour of the Bill who confessed to me yesterday that he had never read it and clearly knew little of it and liked less what we told him - such men will force the rabble uppermost before they themselves must sink'.

RJ only saw McCulloch's [John R. McCulloch] second edition after his own book ['An Essay on the Distribution of Wealth and on the Sources of Taxation', 1831] had come out: 'they illustrate the effects of Ricardo's system upon the intellect of recipients and are something like what you want I suppose'.

Trinity College - WW is sorry RJ ever got involved with the Professorship in Political Economy at King's College: 'it is now very clear that it will either never come at all, or will come in such a way as to be no great advantage or comfort to you'. WW is more concerned at 'the danger of your publication of your next volume being retarded by it'. WW does not see a chance 'of any one doing what you would do for the science, soon, or I could almost say, ever. To bring the facts of the historical and economical condition of nations under general laws, when once done will never be forgotten, and the effects of such a view will be forthwith and forever operative...It is the only way too, to bring common practice and common sympathy within sight of sound theory'. If he does not continue he will be remembered as a young author extinguished by J. R. McCulloch. As for 'Whately [Richard Whately] and his logic you may neglect him or kick hm as you like. You will of course soon be as completely out of his reach as a man who walks forwards is of a man who stands still and prances'. WW has finished his Bridgewater treatise ['Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology', 1833] and sent it to the Bishop of London and the President of the Royal Society to examine.

Trinity College - RJ's library books are overdue and WW has already paid 24 shillings on his behalf. RJ should bring 'all your sayings and clear arguments against Peter McCulloch' when he comes up to Cambridge: WW has 'disposed of his [McCulloch's] cousin John', and is 'quite desirous to economise a little'.

Trinity College - Due to lectures and other matters WW has been brought to a stand still on the subject of 'McCulloch and his absurdities'. He hopes RJ's views and arguments will get him going again. WW agrees with all RJ's points: 'but I foster a difficulty in stating what is the law according to which improvements in agriculture proceed. They are so discontinuous and anomalous that it is scarcely possible to assert anything about them in general terms, and at the same time all readers want positive assertion, and will look to me what you oppose to the dogma, of the other party'.

Trinity College - It looks like Lockhart [John Lockhart] at last intends to put WW's review of RJ in the Quarterly Review. The article will hopefully do more good than if WW had written it against Peter [possibly William Peter or Karl L. Peter]: 'Still I should have liked much to have a knock at him for his reasoning in the Edinburgh...We must judge as well as we can whether after this article appears it is needful to answer Peter's puzzles'. WW is inclined to do so since they are the puzzles of an array of people: 'The two main points seem to be the proof that Ricardo, the Ricardians etc not merely mean Ricardian rents, which I suppose can be made out palpably enough: and the proof that McCulloch [J. R. McCulloch] himself has never had any but the most imperfect and incoherent glimpses of the effect of agricultural improvements; and that you have labour up that part in a way which shews the importance and having of it'. WW only talks of such projects for speculations sake. 'I do not know whether you are exactly aware how the young Ricardians will meet your proofs that the increase of rent is owing to improvement'. WW explains how he thinks they will counter RJ's claims.

Trinity College - WW has 'a vehement zeal to illuminate McCulloch [J. R. McCulloch] and his tribe. I have got Smith [Cambridge University Press] to sort permission to have your second volume printed which was granted without hesitation'.

Trinity College - Will RJ look over WW's 'Physical Theology' ['Astronomy and General Physics Considered with Reference to Natural Theology', 1833]...and say how far you think the selection of arguments and the mode of presenting them will answer the purpose'. WW hears that RJ is to be reviewed in the Edinburgh Review by McCulloch [J.R. McCulloch] - 'so prepare for a flogging'.

Longman's have produced a supplement to McCulloch's Commercial Dictionary and a new edition of the Geographical Dictionary, would Milnes like to order them? Encloses second part of [Bossuet's memoirs of] The Great Condé.