[125] The strange attempt of James Mill to show that the interest element stands for labor also, mistook, as we showed in Chapter vi, the replacement fund of an entrepreneur for his interest fund. [126] In his notes in a French edition of Ricardo’s _Principles_, “_Des Principes de l’Economie Politique et de l’Impôt_,” 2d ed. Paris (1835), note, p. 12. [127] _Essay on the Production of Wealth_, p. 65. [128] The principle of this choice had very little in common with the principle of the various “multiple standards of value” since proposed. [129] 1st ed., pp. 128-9. [130] 1st ed., p. 129. [131] See _ante_, p. 27, n. [132] 2d ed., p. 96. [133] 2d ed., p. 57. [134] Prepared as the article on “Political Economy” in the _Encyclopædia Metropolitana_, 1836, but appearing as a separate work in numerous reprints from this. Page references are good for any edition. The table of contents looks systematic at first blush, but study of the text, especially the part on the theory of distribution, soon dispels any illusions concerning this point. [135] Senior was, in my judgment, indebted fully as much to Malthus and Say as to Ricardo. To all appearances much of interest in the writings of Cairnes must have been suggested by the work of Senior. [136] _Political Economy_, p. 6. These are the three constituents of _wealth_, but things composing wealth are defined to be the same as things of value. Curiously the qualification of transferableness is held not to exclude personal talents from the category of wealth, for these are considered to be things “imperfectly transferable.” A lawyer transfers his talents to me when I hire him to plead my case. See pp. 9-10. [137] P. 24. A similar passage, not so well expressed, is found in Malthus, _Principles_, 1st ed., p. 74. [138] P. 101. [139] See _ante_, chap. vi, § 2. [140] P. 58. Scrope, an English writer, 1833, said: “Profit is to be viewed in the light of a compensation for abstaining for a time from consumption in personal gratification.” Mentioned by Böhm-Bawerk, _Capital and Interest_, p. 271. “But,” continues Böhm-Bawerk, “this same idea which his predecessors merely touched on, Senior has made the center of a well-constructed theory of interest.” [141] P. 100. [142] P. 97. [143] P. 97. _Cf._ p. 105. [144] But yet of all English writers previous to Jevons, he develops the explanation most compatible with the utility theory of value. [145] P. 101. [146] P. 101. [147] Pp. 91-2. P. 128, the question of nomenclature is discussed all over again. Rent is “the revenue spontaneously offered by nature or accident.” [148] Pp. 91, 128-135. For general argument to justify inclusion of personal qualities within _wealth_, see pp. 9-10.