Page:Russian Realities and Problems - ed. James Duff (1917).djvu/211

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
A. S. Lappo-Danilevsky
197

The liberal school—Posnikov, Isaev and others—were inclined to accept rather than reject these views. During these controversies the historical school made further progress: to a certain degree Korsak manifested such a tendency in his acute investigations on "the forms of industry"; Yanshul contributed to it in his studies on the influence of economic conditions on finance; many others maintained it in more special works. The evolution of the historical school was, however, visibly hindered by the vigorous expansion of Marxism in Russia. In his general treatise on political economy Chuprov adopted Marx's theory of value, although he was rather inclined to adhere to the historical school; besides railway economics, he studied the small farm industry and the various forms of cooperation necessary for its success, wrote articles on different questions, some of which concerned practical economics, trained many pupils, etc. Vorontsov and Nicolaion agreed with Marx's attack on capitalism. Plehanov, Iljin, and, for a time, Struve, Tugan-Baranovsky and many others became convinced adherents of Marx's doctrine and developed it to its utmost consequences. In course of time, however, a new tendency, partly anticipated by Sieber, manifested itself: Struve, Tugan-Baranovsky and some others began to appreciate the ethical principles of social organization and evolution; the manual of Tugan-Baranovsky, for instance, is written by an author who tries just now to apply Kantian morals to the construction of a socialistic ideal.

The study of law and institutions in Russia had a more remote origin: it developed under the influence