Many of those who have spoken on occasions similar to the present, have signalized their entrance on the work of a Professor by indicating the scope and method of the science professed. It was thus that my illustrious predecessor, Senior, in the introductory lecture on Political Economy which he delivered before the University of Oxford almost two-thirds of a century ago, described the provinces of theory and practice, and the wide and slippery interval by which they are separated. So Dieterici—a great name in the annals of statistics—in his inaugural address to the University of Berlin[2], almost as long ago, showed the opposite errors of 'mere philosophy and mere experience.' In fine, not to multiply authoritative instances, the present occupant of the chair of Political Economy at Cambridge, on his accession to that eminence, gave a memorable discourse on the present position of Economics. I follow these precedents in the choice of a subject; I cannot follow them in the originality of its treatment. Difficile est proprie communia dicere; I shall endeavour to appropriate to the present occasion reflections which others have made common property.
In this spirit, approaching first that part of our subject which authorities on method distinguish as abstract or theoretical, I submit that there is a certain congruity between the theory of political economy and the studies which are particularly characteristic of this university, the great Oxford school of literæ humaniores. For the ideal of demonstrative science which is
- ↑ Delivered before the University of Oxford, October 23rd, 1891.
- ↑ De vid et ratione economiam politicam docendi, Berlin, 1835.
No. 4.—vol. i s s
